Chris Quenelle wrote: > > > Well, the code I am working on right now is ksh93 and that is not really > > a CPU-hungry monster application... I would even be happy with something > > which needs 50times more time for execution... > > That's good to know in terms of setting our priorities.
Well, a working but time-consuming "dbx -check access" functionality on AMD64 can simple be scriped and run over night... the alternative is to crawl over the source code manually and try to "guess" what may be the cause for the problem... ;-( > > BTW: What about using "valgrind"'s solution to rewrite the code on > > demand (e.g. replace priviledged instructions etc.) ? > > There is nothing wrong with that approach in general, it's just that our > existing RTC technology uses a completely different approach. > Both approaches have OS-interface issues that create major > maintenance problems. Erm... "valgrind" has an OS interface ?! > > Uhm... I thought the "utrap" feature is something unique to the > > UltraSPARC hardware... or am I completely wrong here ? > > Yes, I think the RFE is misnamed. It is really requesting something > like the "fast trap" interface, using whatever CPU features that > might be available. Someone updated the description, so you should > be able to read more details in the bug, as soon as the bug update gets > pushed out. Thanks! :-) ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list [email protected]
