Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #30786

Re: Stack analysis tool that really work?

Path csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Stack analysis tool that really work?
Date Mon, 9 Aug 2021 22:59:36 +0300
Organization Tidorum Ltd
Lines 25
Message-ID <indfp8Fnja9U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <sdukj9$8tu$1@dont-email.me> <sea47k$j3s$1@dont-email.me> <seb3fa$82q$1@dont-email.me> <imvvdmFu7i4U1@mid.individual.net> <seek0l$e3r$1@dont-email.me> <in05quF11e0U1@mid.individual.net> <sef5c3$5so$1@dont-email.me> <in1tnaFbu8rU1@mid.individual.net> <segoc2$6dj$1@dont-email.me> <in2f27FfeehU1@mid.individual.net> <egrrggh9q1hasur4lt1unptujjhvk2v5ra@4ax.com> <in768jFeenmU1@mid.individual.net> <uci0hgpvq5a2rr3oel6i68qvgecnb48rke@4ax.com> <inc519Feuf2U1@mid.individual.net> <87czqmpj9h.fsf@nightsong.com>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace individual.net Gjlnj3iEd229ViMUZRi7WQJNBc0TRtNJyW7SCo8GCFZlaYE/4m
Cancel-Lock sha1:cwYRBdxz0KD9qt1rzKTF64yZEZI=
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0
In-Reply-To <87czqmpj9h.fsf@nightsong.com>
Content-Language en-US
Xref csiph.com comp.arch.embedded:30786

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2021-08-09 21:26, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> writes:
>> And, AIUI, at present that probability cannot be
>> computed, and certainly depends on the test suite being measured. For
>> example, on whether those tests lead to mispredictions in chains of
>> conditional branches.
> 
> Maybe architectural simulation of the target cpu can help, if the
> architecture is known (i.e. exact workings of the pipelines, branch
> predictors etc).


For timing, one needs *micro* -architectural simulation (as the term is 
commonly used, for example in comp.arch). But I think you mean that, so 
this is a terminological quibble.


> And maybe forthcoming RISC-V cpus will be more open about this than
> the current ARM stuff is.

I suspect that the microarchitecture will be where the various RISC-V 
implementors will compete (that, and peripherals and packaging), so I'm 
not optimistic that they will be very open about their 
microarchitectures. However, I don't know how far into the micro-level 
the RISC-V standardization and open-source licensing extends.

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Stack analysis tool that really work? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 18:22 +0200
  Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-07-29 19:36 +0300
  Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-02 17:56 -0700
    Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-03 11:43 +0300
      Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-03 02:28 -0700
        Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-04 22:14 +0300
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 15:43 -0700
    Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 11:49 +0200
      Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-03 20:17 -0700
        Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 16:43 +0200
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 11:06 -0700
            Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 12:00 +0300
              Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-05 04:54 -0700
      Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-04 20:00 +0300
        Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 10:50 -0700
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-04 21:50 +0300
            Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-04 15:46 -0700
              Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 13:43 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-05 06:16 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 18:39 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-06 01:09 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-06 22:58 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-06 16:04 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-06 16:06 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 14:20 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 10:26 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 20:46 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 15:14 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 14:09 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 08:09 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 19:50 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 20:02 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-07 10:34 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 21:10 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2021-08-06 22:55 -0400
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-07 13:40 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2021-08-08 18:34 -0400
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-09 10:50 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2021-08-09 11:26 -0700
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-09 22:59 +0300
                Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-09 12:04 -0700
          Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2021-08-05 13:18 +0300
            Re: Stack analysis tool that really work? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-08-05 04:59 -0700

csiph-web