On my phone, so I'll be brief, but just fixing the scons to be consistent
sounds good to me.
On Jun 1, 2011 6:55 PM, "Gabriel Michael Black" <gbl...@eecs.umich.edu>
wrote:
> So, I think part of the confusion is that there are two names now,
> debug flags and trace flags, but they're different views of the same
> mechanism (yes? no?) It seems like the --trace* options are like the
> --debug* options, except their intended use is a subset of --debug*,
> specifically DPRINTFs. What about returning the DPRINTF ones to
> --trace-flags, etc., and introducing a separate parallel set of
> options and namespace for the debug stuff? There's some macro or
> something to check if trace flags are turned on, and that encourages
> their use as debug flags (although I think that use is minimal in the
> current code). We could introduce a new DEBUG_ON() macro (or a better
> name) and optionally eliminate the trace oriented one or make it
> internal to DPRINTFs only. I can think of some valid uses for keeping
> it like blocks of DPRINTFs like Ali added recently, but it blurs the
> line and could add to the confusion.
>
> By having two parallel systems, even though they're a bit redundant
> where they overlap, I think it introduces a clear conceptual
> separation between the two. Then it's clear what trace flags are for
> and when to use them, and also what debug flags are for and when to
> use them.
>
> We really have two different ideas budding off from each other
> (controlling tracing and debug features), and by partially bundling
> them together and partially distinguishing them that leads to
> confusion. The mental model is different from the way you have to
> control things, and trying to reconcile the two views makes the system
> hard to reason about.
>
> Gabe
>
> Quoting nathan binkert <n...@binkert.org>:
>
>> Ok, there has been a lot of confusion about debug flags and trace
>> flags. I changed the way the flags stuff worked from a compile
>> perspective which required me to make changes throughout the tree, so
>> I took the opportunity to rename the trace flags to debug flags. The
>> idea behind the change was that the flags can be used for things other
>> than tracing (I use them for breakpoints) and there is only one
>> namespace, so I just renamed it to debug (people did review that
>> change).
>>
>> So, I renamed --trace-flags to --debug-flags and --trace-flags-help to
>> --debug-flags-help. --trace-start, --trace-file, and --trace-ignore
>> stayed the same because those only affect the tracing portion of the
>> debugging stuff. I never renamed the TraceFlags SCons option to
>> DebugFlags.
>>
>> So, how do we clear up the confusion? Should I just fix the SCons
>> thing and people will just learn? Should I change the name back?
>> (There are a ton of places where this would change).
>>
>> Anyone care?
>>
>> Nate
>> _______________________________________________
>> gem5-dev mailing list
>> gem5-dev@m5sim.org
>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-dev mailing list
> gem5-dev@m5sim.org
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
