Bug 546006
Summary: | Incorrect values for parameters using process().function() | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Dave Malcolm <dmalcolm> |
Component: | systemtap | Assignee: | Frank Ch. Eigler <fche> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 12 | CC: | fche, jistone, mjw, mjw, roland, wcohen |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2010-02-21 18:02:42 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 546295 |
Description
Dave Malcolm
2009-12-09 19:19:17 UTC
This could be related to systemtap PR 10601, which we're expecting to fix for an impending next release of systemtap. > This could be related to systemtap PR 10601, which we're expecting to fix for > an impending next release of systemtap. URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10601 I notice that you marked http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10601 as RESOLVED FIXED on 2009-12-21 - thanks. Are these fixes in rawhide yet? (pretty-please!) (In reply to comment #3) > I notice that you marked http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10601 > as RESOLVED FIXED on 2009-12-21 - thanks. > > Are these fixes in rawhide yet? (pretty-please!) Yes, they should be available with systemtap-1.1-1.fc13. This also provides the systemtap dtrace -I script support. (In reply to comment #0) > I'm also sometimes seeing error messages in pass 1 of the > form: > semantic error: No cfa_ops supplied, but needed by DW_OP_call_frame_cfa > when I make the script more complex; should I file that as a separate bug? Yes please, if you see it after updating to systemtap-1.1. There has been one bug fix for 1.1 that addresses one case of DW_OP_call_frame_cfa not being found, but there seems to be some other issue lurking out there. If you get anything with a good reproducer that would be very appreciated. > > I'm also sometimes seeing error messages in pass 1 of the > > form: > > semantic error: No cfa_ops supplied, but needed by DW_OP_call_frame_cfa > > when I make the script more complex; should I file that as a separate bug? > Yes please, if you see it after updating to systemtap-1.1. Still seeing this with 1.1; filed as bug 556944 With systemtap-1.1-2.fc12.i686 I am seeing: $ stap -e 'probe process("/usr/lib/libpython2.6.so.1.0").function("PyObject_Malloc") { printf("PyObject_Malloc(%i)\n", $nbytes); }' -c "python -c 'import gtk; import dbus'" PyObject_Malloc(24) PyObject_Malloc(35) PyObject_Malloc(136) PyObject_Malloc(31) PyObject_Malloc(136) PyObject_Malloc(31) PyObject_Malloc(31) PyObject_Malloc(32) PyObject_Malloc(35) PyObject_Malloc(36) [... lots of different numbers ...] Do these numbers make sense now? Thanks! This is now working well systemtap-1.1-2.fc12.i686 systemtap-sdt-devel-1.1-1.fc12.i686 systemtap-runtime-1.1-2.fc12.i686 The numbers below appear credible; here's an example of the 3 levels of memory allocations, running: python -c"pass"; hope to use this to improve Python's heap-usage behavior. PyObject_Malloc calls: value |-------------------------------------------------- count 0 | 0 1 | 35 2 |@ 322 4 |@ 233 8 | 90 16 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 8855 32 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 10481 64 |@@@@@@@@ 1850 128 |@@ 588 256 |@@ 428 512 |@@ 538 1024 | 16 2048 | 6 4096 | 1 8192 | 1 16384 | 0 32768 | 0 PyMem_Malloc calls: value |-------------------------------------------------- count 1 | 0 2 | 0 4 |@@@@@@@@@@@ 11 8 | 0 16 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 22 32 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 15 64 | 0 128 |@@@@@ 5 256 | 0 512 |@@@@@@@@ 8 1024 | 0 2048 | 0 4096 | 0 8192 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 16 16384 | 0 32768 | 0 malloc calls: value |-------------------------------------------------- count 0 | 0 1 | 1 2 | 1 4 |@@@@@@@@@ 179 8 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 300 16 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 451 32 |@@@@@@ 127 64 |@ 19 128 |@ 23 256 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 905 512 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 576 1024 |@@@@@@@@@@ 205 2048 | 8 4096 | 16 8192 |@ 32 16384 |@ 20 32768 | 4 65536 | 1 131072 | 0 262144 | 3 524288 | 0 1048576 | 0 |