MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070233995 · doi:10.1145/2678022

Dynamically Instrumenting the QEMU Emulator for Linux Process Trace Generation with the GDB Debugger

2014· article· en· W2070233995 on OpenAlexaff
Bojan Mihajlović, Željko Žilić, Warren J. Gross

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDebuggingTRACE (psycholinguistics)EmulationTracingOperating systemProcess (computing)DebuggerSoftwareEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In software debugging, trace generation techniques are used to resolve highly complex bugs. However, the emulators increasingly used for embedded software development do not yet offer the types of trace generation infrastructure available in hardware. In this article, we make changes to the ARM ISA emulation of the QEMU emulator to allow for continuous instruction-level trace generation. Using a standard GDB client, tracepoints can be inserted to dynamically log registers and memory addresses without altering executing code. The ability to run trace experiments in five different modes allows the scope of trace generation to be narrowed as needed, down to the level of a single Linux process. Our scheme collects the execution traces of a Linux process on average between 9.6x--0.7x the speed of existing QEMU trace capabilities, with 96.7% less trace data volume. Compared to a software-instrumented tracing scheme, our method is both unobtrusive and performs on average between 3--4 orders of magnitude faster.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Embedded Computing SystemsSame topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207