|
From: Julian S. <ju...@va...> - 2006-03-03 19:10:14
|
> On Friday 03 March 2006 18:06, you wrote: > Thanks for your instructions -- by this time I got instrumentation of > load and store operations working. Just one question: why does cachegrind > instrument Ist_Dirty, while lackey does not instrument Ist_dirty > instructions ? Should I consider Ist_Dirty ? Yes you should (although it is unlikely to be critical for correctness). The fact that Lackey doesn't consider them is a bug in Lackey - most likely they got overlooked since Ist_Dirty doesn't happen often in practice. Cachegrind is correct. > At this time my trace_load() and trace_store() instructions do nothing > more than call VG_(printf). The statistics I obtained for one particular > run of /bin/ls are as follows (on i386): > - 804314 loads + stores in total. > Accesses by access size: > - 590210 accesses of size 4. > - 5755 accesses of size 2. > - 208349 accesses of size 1. Seems plausible. Remember also you will get loads/stores of size 8. J |