My understanding with respect to C/C++ was that the library could be implemented in C++, but that there had to be a C callable API to facilitate easy bindings.
Best regards,
Tor Jeremiassen
--- Tor Jeremiassen, Ph.D. Senior Member Technical Staff SDO Foundational Tools Texas Instruments Ph: 832 939 2356 13905 University Lane Fax: 832 939 2015 Sugar Land, TX 77479 Email: tor@ti.commailto:tor@ti.com
From: CoreSight [mailto:coresight-bounces@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Mark Brown Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:04 PM To: Mike Leach Cc: coresight@lists.linaro.org Subject: RE: API Document
On 22 Jun 2015 5:54 pm, "Mike Leach" <Mike.Leach@arm.commailto:Mike.Leach@arm.com> wrote:
Hi Mathieu,
Thanks for the feedback. I'll not comment individually on each section other than to say I agree that there is inconsistent terminology used and have addressed each element you pointed out.
There will be a new version of the document published shortly which will include the corrections, along with a new section on the updated snapshot format that was discussed at the last phone meeting.
To the C++ question - the answer is yes. The work we are currently undertaking on the infrastructure and packet decoders is implemented in C++.
Is your current intention to change to C in the future? The discussion in the meetings had been that the library would be C based to maximise deployability. If the external interfaces of the library are C++ based that seems like it might cause problems binding to other languages.
Regards
Mike
Mike Leach +44 (0)1254 893911 (Direct) Principal Engineer +44 (0)1254 893900 (Main) Arm Blackburn Design Centre +44 (0)1254 893901 (Fax) Belthorn House Walker Rd mailto:mike.leach@arm.commailto:mike.leach@arm.com Guide Blackburn BB1 2QE
-----Original Message----- From: Mathieu Poirier [mailto:mathieu.poirier@linaro.orgmailto:mathieu.poirier@linaro.org] Sent: 16 June 2015 17:52 To: Mike Leach Cc: coresight@lists.linaro.orgmailto:coresight@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: API Document
Good day Mike,
I reviewed the document that was submitted and have the following comments - at this time most of them surround the terminology that was used. I may be a little slow to catch on but for someone not familiar with trace decoding engines it is extremely difficult to wrap one's head around new concepts when variations are used.
I read the entire document twice but can't provide comments on section 2.3 and beyond before the following points are clarified.
Section 2.1.1:
- "Where the source is a core the decoder will be a PE decoder..." :
Are we still talking about the "packet trace decoder" or something else?
- "The protocol block will require..." : Are we talking about the
"Protocol decode block"?
- The reader must assume the "generic trace primitives" are the same
as the "generic trace elements" introduced in chapter 2.1.5. If so the latter should be used throughout the document.
Section 2.1.2:
- "The trace formatted frame decoder is provided..." : Are we talking
about the "trace frame deformatter". Without using the same terms, there is no way to tell.
- "A decode block can be attached..." : What is a "decode block"? I
must assume we are referring to a "Protocol decode block".
Section 2.1.4:
- "Packet processors and decoders can be...": Are we talking about
the packet processor and packet "trace decoder" presented in section 2.1.1? If so "trace decoder" needs to be referenced explicitly.
Figure 1:
- Is the "Trace Decode Block" the "Protocol decode block" presented
in section 2.1.1? If so section 2.1.1 needs to be modified to include the "Trace Frame Deformatter". Following the figure I think the latter should be presented first, followed by the "packet processor" and "packet decoder" descriptions.
One of the main provider of trace stream to the "Trace Decode Block" will be the user space Perf tool. I am currently working on how the gap between Perf and the Trace Decode Block will be bridged.
Figure 2:
- One must assume the green box labelled "stream protocol decode
block" is the same as what was presented in Figure 1. If so the same names need to be used in both figures.
I would add "Perf" in the "formatted trace source" box.
Should the "Trace Formatted Frame Decoder" be introduced somewhere
in the documentation? Or maybe it was under a different name?
- "... is the Stream Protocol decode block as previously described".
I must assume this is the "Protocol Decode Block" introduced in section 2.1.1. If so the same terminology has to be use throughout the document.
Section 3.1:
I noticed that C++ syntax was used - is this strictly for documentation purposes or should I deduce that ARM favours using C++ in the implementation?
Best regards, Mathieu
On 27 May 2015 at 10:29, Mike Leach <Mike.Leach@arm.commailto:Mike.Leach@arm.com> wrote:
Hi,
As discussed I have attached the API document that describes the design
and current implementation of a CoreSight decoder library framework that we have been working on within ARM.
This is very much a work in progress (both the document and the API) - but
questions / comments etc. are always welcome.
The document does have a distribution list on the front but it is not limited
by this so if I have missed anyone off I apologise.
Regards
Mike
Mike Leach +44 (0)1254 893911 (Direct) Principal Engineer +44 (0)1254 893900 (Main) Arm Blackburn Design Centre +44 (0)1254 893901 (Fax) Belthorn House Walker Rd mailto:mike.leach@arm.commailto:mike.leach@arm.com Guide Blackburn BB1 2QE
-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ,
Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2557590
ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1
9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2548782
CoreSight mailing list CoreSight@lists.linaro.orgmailto:CoreSight@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/coresight
-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2557590 ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2548782 _______________________________________________ CoreSight mailing list CoreSight@lists.linaro.orgmailto:CoreSight@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/coresight