My ETM trace is captured separately and loaded with TRACE32 command LA.IMPORT (It is not connected directly with a device)
How to filter all the records for each core means run 0,1,2 ... from ETB dump in separate windows for LA method?
Is there method which provides trace data same like capturing from device ?
I tried using Trace.Find ,core 0 but it is not working. It prints the record number but when I try using print trace.record.data(recno) (recno here is which is output of Trace.Find ,core 0) I didn't get any record data
Can you please try the below commands to check trace data records for core n after importing etb dump . Please comment if it worked or not.
la.list /core n
or
trace.list /core n
I could not get the 2nd question.
The ETB dump is as good as the trace obtained through live capturing from device. Only difference is that the etb data is stored in DDR or other location, and in live capturing it will be saved in t32 device memory and they will be saved with timestamps if cycle accurate tracing is enabled. If there are no fifo overflows, both will be identical. Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.
Related
I'm realizing UART-DMA with STM_HAL library and I want to know if message size is counted by hardware (counting clock ticks till line is idle for example) or by some program method(something like strlen). So if Size in
HAL_UARTEx_RxEventCallback(UART_HandleTypeDef *huart, uint16_t Size)
is counted by hardware, I can send data in pure HEX format, but if it is calculated by something like strline, I may recieve problems if data is 0x00 and have to send data in ASCII.
I've tried to make some research in generated code in Keil but failed (maybe I didn't try hard enough) so maybe somebody can help me.
If you are using UART DMA, it is calculated by hardware.
If you check the call hierarchy of HAL_UARTEx_RxEventCallback using your ide, you can see how the Size variable is calculated.
The function is executed in the following flow.(Depending on the version of HAL Driver, it may be slightly different)
UART Idle Interrupt occur
Call HAL_UART_IRQHandler()
If DMA mod is enabled, Call HAL_UARTEx_RxEventCallback(huart, (huart->RxXferSize - huart->RxXferCount))
Therefore, Size variable is calculated as (huart->RxXferSize - huart->RxXferCount)
huart->RxXferSize is a set value when initializing RX DMA.
huart->RxXferCount is (huart->hdmarx)->Instance->NDTR
NDTR is a value calculated by hardware as the size of the buffer remaining after DMA transfer data to memory!!
I'm trying to play with Kafka Stream to aggregate some attribute of People.
I have a kafka stream test like this :
new ConsumerRecordFactory[Array[Byte], Character]("input", new ByteArraySerializer(), new CharacterSerializer())
var i = 0
while (i != 5) {
testDriver.pipeInput(
factory.create("input",
Character(123,12), 15*10000L))
i+=1;
}
val output = testDriver.readOutput....
I'm trying to group the value by key like this :
streamBuilder.stream[Array[Byte], Character](inputKafkaTopic)
.filter((key, _) => key == null )
.mapValues(character=> PersonInfos(character.id, character.id2, character.age) // case class
.groupBy((_, value) => CharacterInfos(value.id, value.id2) // case class)
.count().toStream.print(Printed.toSysOut[CharacterInfos, Long])
When i'm running the code, I got this :
[KTABLE-TOSTREAM-0000000012]: CharacterInfos(123,12), 1
[KTABLE-TOSTREAM-0000000012]: CharacterInfos(123,12), 2
[KTABLE-TOSTREAM-0000000012]: CharacterInfos(123,12), 3
[KTABLE-TOSTREAM-0000000012]: CharacterInfos(123,12), 4
[KTABLE-TOSTREAM-0000000012]: CharacterInfos(123,12), 5
Why i'm getting 5 rows instead of just one line with CharacterInfos and the count ?
Doesn't groupBy just change the key ?
If you use the TopologyTestDriver caching is effectively disabled and thus, every input record will always produce an output record. This is by design, because caching implies non-deterministic behavior what makes itsvery hard to write an actual unit test.
If you deploy the code in a real application, the behavior will be different and caching will reduce the output load -- which intermediate results you will get, is not defined (ie, non-deterministic); compare Michael Noll's answer.
For your unit test, it should actually not really matter, and you can either test for all output records (ie, all intermediate results), or put all output records into a key-value Map and only test for the last emitted record per key (if you don't care about the intermediate results) in the test.
Furthermore, you could use suppress() operator to get fine grained control over what output messages you get. suppress()—in contrast to caching—is fully deterministic and thus writing a unit test works well. However, note that suppress() is event-time driven, and thus, if you stop sending new records, time does not advance and suppress() does not emit data. For unit testing, this is important to consider, because you might need to send some additional "dummy" data to trigger the output you actually want to test for. For more details on suppress() check out this blog post: https://www.confluent.io/blog/kafka-streams-take-on-watermarks-and-triggers
Update: I didn't spot the line in the example code that refers to the TopologyTestDriver in Kafka Streams. My answer below is for the 'normal' KStreams application behavior, whereas the TopologyTestDriver behaves differently. See the answer by Matthias J. Sax for the latter.
This is expected behavior. Somewhat simplified, Kafka Streams emits by default a new output record as soon as a new input record was received.
When you are aggregating (here: counting) the input data, then the aggregation result will be updated (and thus a new output record produced) as soon as new input was received for the aggregation.
input record 1 ---> new output record with count=1
input record 2 ---> new output record with count=2
...
input record 5 ---> new output record with count=5
What to do about it: You can reduce the number of 'intermediate' outputs through configuring the size of the so-called record caches as well as the setting of the commit.interval.ms parameter. See Memory Management. However, how much reduction you will be seeing depends not only on these settings but also on the characteristics of your input data, and because of that the extent of the reduction may also vary over time (think: could be 90% in the first hour of data, 76% in the second hour of data, etc.). That is, the reduction process is deterministic but from the resulting reduction amount is difficult to predict from the outside.
Note: When doing windowed aggregations (like windowed counts) you can also use the Suppress() API so that the number of intermediate updates is not only reduced, but there will only ever be a single output per window. However, in your use case/code you the aggregation is not windowed, so cannot use the Suppress API.
To help you understand why the setup is this way: You must keep in mind that a streaming system generally operates on unbounded streams of data, which means the system doesn't know 'when it has received all the input data'. So even the term 'intermediate outputs' is actually misleading: at the time the second input record was received, for example, the system believes that the result of the (non-windowed) aggregation is '2' -- its the correct result to the best of its knowledge at this point in time. It cannot predict whether (or when) another input record might arrive.
For windowed aggregations (where Suppress is supported) this is a bit easier, because the window size defines a boundary for the input data of a given window. Here, the Suppress() API allows you to make a trade-off decision between better latency but with multiple outputs per window (default behavior, Suppress disabled) and longer latency but you'll get only a single output per window (Suppress enabled). In the latter case, if you have 1h windows, you will not see any output for a given window until 1h later, so to speak. For some use cases this is acceptable, for others it is not.
I have a question regarding buffering in between blocks in GNU Radio. I know that each block in GNU (including custom blocks) have buffers to store items that are going to be sent or received items. In my project, there is a certain sequence I have to maintain to synchronize events between blocks. I am using GNU radio on the Xilinx ZC706 FPGA platform with the FMCOMMS5.
In the GNU radio companion I created a custom block that controls a GPIO Output port on the board. In addition, I have an independent source block that is feeding information into the FMCOMMS GNU block. The sequence I am trying to maintain is that, in GNU radio, I first send data to the FMCOMMS block, second I want to make sure that the data got consumed by the FMCOMMS block (essentially by checking buffer), then finally I want to control the GPIO output.
From my observations, the source block buffer doesn’t seem to send the items until it’s full. This will cause a major issue in my project because this means that the GPIO data will be sent before or in parallel with sending the items to the other GNU blocks. That’s because I’m setting the GPIO value through direct access to its address in the ‘work’ function of my custom block.
I tried to use pc_output_buffers_full() in the ‘work’ function of my custom source in order to monitor the buffer, but I’m always getting 0.00. I’m not sure if it’s supposed to be used in custom blocks or if the ‘buffer’ in this case is something different from where the output items are stored. Here's a small code snippet which shows the problem:
char level_count = 0, level_val = 1;
vector<float> buff (1, 0.0000);
for(int i=0; i< noutput_items; i++)
{
if(level_count < 20 && i< noutput_items)
{
out[i] = gr_complex((float)level_val,0);
level_count++;
}
else if(i<noutput_items)
{
level_count = 0;
level_val ^=1;
out[i] = gr_complex((float)level_val,0);
}
buff = pc_output_buffers_full();
for (int n = 0; n < buff.size(); n++)
cout << fixed << setw(5) << setprecision(2) << setfill('0') << buff[n] << " ";
cout << "\n";
}
Is there a way to monitor the buffer so that I can determine when my first part of data bits have been sent? Or is there a way to make sure that the each single output item is being sent like a continuous stream to the next block(s)?
GNU Radio Companion version: 3.7.8
OS: Linaro 14.04 image running on the FPGA
Or is there a way to make sure that the each single output item is being sent like a continuous stream to the next block(s)?
Nope, that's not how GNU Radio works (at all!):
A while back I wrote an article that explains how GNU Radio deals with buffers, and what these actually are. While the in-memory architecture of GNU Radio buffers might be of lesser interest to you, let me quickly summarize the dynamics of it:
The buffers that (general_)work functions are called with behave for all that's practical like linearly addressable ring buffers. You get a random number of samples at once (restrictable to minimum numbers, multiples of numbers), and all that you not consume will be handed to you the next time work is called.
These buffers hence keep track of how much you've consumed, and thus, how much free space is in a buffer.
The input buffer a block sees is actually the output buffer of the "upstream" block in the flow graph.
GNU Radio's computation is backpressure-controlled: Any block's work method will immediately be called in an endless loop given that:
There's enough input for the block to do work,
There's enough output buffer space to write to.
Therefore, as soon as one block finishes its work call, the upstream block is informed that there's new free output space, thus typically leading to it running
That leads to high parallelity, since even adjacent blocks can run simultaneously without conflicting
This architecture favors large chunks of input items, especially for blocks that take a relative long time to computer: while the block is still working, its input buffer is already being filled with chunks of samples; when it's finished, chances are it's immediately called again with all the available input buffer being already filled with new samples.
This architecture is asynchronous: even if two blocks are "parallel" in your flow graph, there's no defined temporal relation between the numbers of items they produce.
I'm not even convinced switching GPIOs at times based on the speed computation in this completely non-deterministic timing data flow graph model is a good idea to start with. Maybe you'd rather want to calculate "timestamps" at which GPIOs should be switched, and send (timestamp, gpio state) command tuples to some entity in your FPGA that keeps absolute time? On the scale of radio propagation and high-rate signal processing, CPU timing is really inaccurate, and you should use the fact that you have an FPGA to actually implement deterministic timing, and use the software running on the CPU (i.e. GNU Radio) to determine when that should happen.
Is there a way to monitor the buffer so that I can determine when my first part of data bits have been sent?
Other than that, a method to asynchronously tell another another block that, yes, you've processed N samples, would be either to have a single block that just observes the outputs of both blocks that you want to synchronize and consumes an identical number of samples from both inputs, or to implement something using message passing. Again, my suspicion is that this is not a solution to your actual problem.
I'm trying to write some code to read from an Isochronous pipe using LibUsbK in Win32. I have successfully initialised the device into the correct state to send and receive Isochronous data and I can see data being sent over the USB in my hardware USB analyser, but the buffers I am receiving are always unfilled even though the analyser shows that there was data in the packets sent to the PC.
I'm new to LibUsbK and using Isochronous transfers though I'm not new to USB in general but I've been really struggling with this.
The code I'm using to read from the device is something like this...
UsbK_SelectInterface(usbHandle,1,0);
UsbK_SetAltInterface(usbHandle,1,0,1);
IsoK_Init(&isoCtx, ISO_PACKETS_PER_XFER, 0);
IsoK_SetPackets(isoCtx, ISO_PACKET_SIZE); // Size of each individual packet
OvlK_Init(&ovlPool, usbHandle, 4, 0);
OvlK_ResetPipe(usbHandle, 0x83);
OclK_Acquire(&ovlkHandle, ovlPool);
UsbK_IsoReadPipe(usbHandle, 0x83, inBuffer, sizeof(inBuffer), ovlkHandle, isoCtx);
while(!finished)
{
if(OvlK_IsComplete(ovlkHandle)
{
fwrite(inBuffer, sizeof(inBuffer), 1, outFile);
memset(inBuffer,0xcc,sizeof(inBuffer));
OvlK_ReUse(ovlkHandle);
UsbK_IsoReadPipe(usbHandle, 0x83, inBuffer, sizeof(inBuffer), ovlkHandle, isoCtx);
{
}
If I put a breakpoint at the fwrite line then the inBuffer is always full of 0xCC - ie, not having been filled by the iso read.
I've checked all the error return values from the UsbK/OvlK function calls and they are all as they should be. I've checked my buffers are sufficiently big to receive the data.
I use very similar code to write to the ISO out pipe on endpoint 0x02 and that works perfectly, the only difference really between the code above and my write code is that the fwrite/memset commands are replaced with a call to a "fillbuffer" function that populates my outBuffer before calling UsbK_IsoWritePipe function.
I tried looking through any examples I could find in the samples and also online but struggled to understand/get them to work with my particular device.
Any suggestions or help greatly appreciated.
So it appears that the above code did work and I was being mislead by the fact that the debugger was interrupting the flow of things - I keep forgetting that trying to debug real time stuff can introduce it's own issues.
The first issue was that stepping through the code in the debugger was causing issues with the low level libusbk code capturing the usb packets and filling my buffers correctly - once I let it run full speed and found other ways to test the buffers I did actually find there was some data in there.
The second problem I had was that quite often the buffer was starting to be filled part way through only (and not always right from the start) so when I examined the data I was only printing the first part of the buffer to the console and so all I saw was 0xCC and I was therefore assuming it hadn't worked.
Once I realised that there was actually some data later in the buffer I just started looking through the buffer in packet sized chuncks, if the packet was completely contained of 0xCC I would skip it and move on, but if any of it was not 0xCC then I would treat it as a valid packet - this worked perfectly and I was successfully receiving all the data. I'm sure there's a more "proper" way of doing this, but it works for me now.
I'm currently writing a multi-threaded, high efficient and scalable algorithm. Because I have to guess a parameter for the code and I'm not sure how the calculation performs on a specific data set, I would like to watch a variable. The test only works with a real world, huge data set. It is possible to analyze the collected data after profiling. Imagine the following, simple code example (real code can contain multiple watch points:
// function get's called by loops of multiple threads
void payload(data_t* data, double threshold) {
double value = calc(data);
// here I want to watch the value
if (value < threshold) {
doSomething(data);
} else {
doSomethingElse(data);
}
}
I thought about the following approaches:
Using cout or other system outputs
Use a binary output (file, network)
Set a breakpoint via gdb/lldb
Use variable watching + logging via gdb/lldb
I'm not happy with the results because: To use 1. and 2. I have to change the code, but this is a debugging/evaluating task. Furthermore 1. requires locking and 1.+2. requires I/O operations, which heavily slows down the entire code and makes testing with real data nearly impossible. 3. is also too slow. To use 4., I have to know the variable address because it's not a global variable, but because threads get created by a dynamic scheduler, this would require breaking + stepping for each thread.
So my conclusion is, that I need a profiler/debugger that works at machine code level and dumps/logs/watches the variable without double->string conversion and is highly efficient, or to sum up with other words: I would like to profile the internal state of my algorithm without heavy slow-down and without doing deep modification. Does anybody know a tool that is able to this?
OK, this took some time but now I'm able to present a solution for my problem. It's called tracepoints. Instead of breaking the program every time, it's more lightweight and (ideally) doesn't change performance/timing too much. It does not require code changes. Here is an explanation how to use them using gdb:
Make sure you compiled your program with debugging symbols (using the -g flag). Now, start the gdb server and provide a network port (e.g. 10000) and the program arguments:
gdbserver :10000 ./program --parameters you --want --to use
Now, switch to a second console and start gdb (program parameters are not required here):
gdb ./program
All following commands are entered in the gdb command line interface. So let's connect to the server:
target remote :10000
After you got the connection confirmation, use trace or ftrace to set a tracepoint to a specific source location (try ftrace first, it should be faster but doesn't work on all platforms):
trace source.c:127
This should create tracepoint #1. Now you can setup an action for this tracepoint. Here I want to collect the data from myVariable
action 1
collect myVariable
end
If expect much data or want to use the data later (after restart), you can set a binary trace file:
tsave trace.bin
Now, start tracing and run the program:
tstart
continue
You can wait for program exit or interrupt your program using CTRL-C (still on gdb console, not on server side). Continue by telling gdb that you want to stop tracing:
tstop
Now we come the tricky part and I'm not really happy with the following code because it's really slow:
set pagination off
set logging file trace.txt
tfind start
while ($trace_frame != -1)
set logging on
printf "%f\n", myVariable
set logging off
tfind
end
This dumps all variable data to a text file. You can add some filter or preparation here. Now you're done and you can exit gdb. This will also shutdown the server:
quit
For detailed documentation especially for explanation of filtering and more advanced tracepoint positions, you can visit the following document: http://sourceware.org/gdb/onlinedocs/gdb/Tracepoints.html
To isolate trace file writing from your program execution, you can use cgroups or another network connected computer. When using another computer, you have to add the host to the port information (e.g. 192.168.1.37:10000). To load a binary trace file later, just start gdb as shown above (forget the server) and change the target:
gdb ./program
target tfile trace.bin
you can set hardware watchpoint using gdb debugger, for example if you have
bool b;
variable and you want to be notified every time the value of it has chenged (by any thread)
you would declare a watchpoint like this:
(gdb) watch *(bool*)0x7fffffffe344
example:
root#comp:~# gdb prog
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.5-ubuntu
Copyright ...
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/bugs/>...
Reading symbols from /dist/Debug/GNU-Linux-x86/cppapp_socket5_ipaddresses...done.
(gdb) watch *(bool*)0x7fffffffe344
Hardware watchpoint 1: *(bool*)0x7fffffffe344
(gdb) start
Temporary breakpoint 2 at 0x40079f: file main.cpp, line 26.
Starting program: /dist/Debug/GNU-Linux-x86/cppapp_socket5_ipaddresses
Hardware watchpoint 1: *(bool*)0x7fffffffe344
Old value = true
New value = false
main () at main.cpp:50
50 if (strcmp(mask, "255.0.0.0") != 0) {
(gdb) c
Continuing.
Hardware watchpoint 1: *(bool*)0x7fffffffe344
Old value = false
New value = true
main () at main.cpp:41
41 if (ifa ->ifa_addr->sa_family == AF_INET) { // check it is IP4
(gdb) c
Continuing.
mask:255.255.255.0
eth0 IP Address 192.168.1.5
[Inferior 1 (process 18146) exited normally]
(gdb) q