* bfd_find_inliner_info reports different (wrong) information compared to GDB - off-by-one?
@ 2016-10-05 15:45 Milian Wolff
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Milian Wolff @ 2016-10-05 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: elfutils-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2444 bytes --]
Hello,
I'm trying to improve Linux perf report by adding inliner information to the
callstacks it reports, to make the output more easily interpretable when
looking at complicated C++ applications.
I have a proof of concept locally using bfd_find_inliner_info, but have
noticed the following seemingly broken behavior:
Input file:
~~~~~~~~~test.cpp~~~~~~~
#include <cstdlib>
#include <iostream>
#include <complex>
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
double a = 0;
double b = 0;
if (argc > 1)
a = atof(argv[1]);
if (argc > 2)
b = atof(argv[2]);
auto c = std::complex<double>(a, b);
std::cout << std::abs(c) << std::endl;
}
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I build it with:
~~~~~~~~~building~~~~~~~
$ g++ -g -O2 -o test test.cpp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Then I get a "good" backtrace using GDB:
~~~~~~~~~gdb~~~~~~~~~~~~
$ gdb ./test
(gdb) break hypot
Function "hypot" not defined.
Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) y
Breakpoint 1 (hypot) pending.
(gdb) run
Starting program: /tmp/test
Breakpoint 1, 0x00007ffff776e910 in hypot () from /usr/lib/libm.so.6
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00007ffff776e910 in hypot () from /usr/lib/libm.so.6
#1 0x00000000004007f4 in std::__complex_abs (__z=<optimized out>) at /usr/
include/c++/6.2.1/complex:589
#2 std::abs<double> (__z=<synthetic pointer>) at /usr/include/c++/6.2.1/
complex:597
#3 main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at test.cpp:14
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Note what inliners it reports for the address 0x00000000004007f4. Let's try
bfd_find_inliner_info via eu-addr2line -i:
~~~~~~~~~eu-addr2line~~~
eu-addr2line -i -a 0x00000000004007f4 -e ./test
0x00000000004007f4
/usr/include/c++/6.2.1/ostream:221
/tmp/test.cpp:14
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is wrong and seems to be off-by-one:
~~~~~~~~~eu-addr2line~~~
eu-addr2line -i -a 0x00000000004007f3 -e ./test
0x00000000004007f3
/usr/include/c++/6.2.1/complex:589
/usr/include/c++/6.2.1/complex:597
/tmp/test.cpp:14
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Can someone with more knowledge in this area sched some light on what is going
on here please? Is it a bug, or is this fuzzy behavior and GDB happens to be
better at guessing the "right" thing?
Some system info:
linux 4.7.2-1-ARCH
eu-addr2line 0.167
g++ 6.2.1
gdb 7.11.1
Thanks
--
Milian Wolff
mail@milianw.de
http://milianw.de
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: bfd_find_inliner_info reports different (wrong) information compared to GDB - off-by-one?
@ 2016-10-05 22:23 Milian Wolff
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Milian Wolff @ 2016-10-05 22:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: elfutils-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2263 bytes --]
On Mittwoch, 5. Oktober 2016 22:22:34 CEST Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Milian,
>
> On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 17:45 +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> > I'm trying to improve Linux perf report by adding inliner information to
> > the callstacks it reports, to make the output more easily interpretable
> > when looking at complicated C++ applications.
>
> You might want to take a look at eu-stack (src/stack.c) in elfutils
> which does this too. If you are using the elfutils libraries (libdw.so).
<snip, and reordered>
> I don't know what gdb exactly displays as address in that backtrace.
> It might display the return address, in which case subtracting 1 is the
> right thing to do on x86_64 (that would be an approximation of the call
> address, which is what you want).
>
> And in fact that is what eu-stack does:
>
> (gdb) gcore test.core
> Saved corefile test.core
>
> $ eu-stack -v --core test.core --exec test
> PID 32623 - core
> TID 32623:
> #0 0x00007ffff77f8cf0 __hypot - libm.so.6
> /usr/src/debug/glibc-2.17-c758a686/math/w_hypot.c:23
> #1 0x0000000000400824 - 1 __complex_abs - test
> /usr/include/c++/4.8.2/complex:587
> #2 0x0000000000400824 - 1 abs<double> - test
> /usr/include/c++/4.8.2/complex:595
> #3 0x0000000000400824 - 1 main - test
> /tmp/test.cpp:14
> #4 0x00007ffff721db35 - 1 __libc_start_main - libc.so.6
> ../csu/libc-start.c:274
> #5 0x000000000040088f - 1 _start - test
Thanks, I have had a look at the sources and found the code for the adjustion:
Dwarf_Addr pc = frames->frame[nr].pc;
bool isactivation = frames->frame[nr].isactivation;
Dwarf_Addr pc_adjusted = pc - (isactivation ? 0 : 1);
The isactivation information comes from dwfl_frame_pc, so that should be all I
need to use this properly in Linux perf - thanks!
> > I have a proof of concept locally using bfd_find_inliner_info
>
> I don't know what bfd_find_inliner_info is.
> It sound like something from binutils?
Oh, indeed - I mixed up the two. Sorry for that, and thanks a lot for still
helping me out. I will check whether using dwfl instead of bfd for this
purpose may be advantageous.
Cheers
--
Milian Wolff
mail@milianw.de
http://milianw.de
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 163 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: bfd_find_inliner_info reports different (wrong) information compared to GDB - off-by-one?
@ 2016-10-05 20:22 Mark Wielaard
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mark Wielaard @ 2016-10-05 20:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: elfutils-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3656 bytes --]
Hi Milian,
On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 17:45 +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> I'm trying to improve Linux perf report by adding inliner information to the
> callstacks it reports, to make the output more easily interpretable when
> looking at complicated C++ applications.
You might want to take a look at eu-stack (src/stack.c) in elfutils
which does this too. If you are using the elfutils libraries (libdw.so).
> I have a proof of concept locally using bfd_find_inliner_info
I don't know what bfd_find_inliner_info is.
It sound like something from binutils?
> , but have
> noticed the following seemingly broken behavior:
>
> Input file:
> ~~~~~~~~~test.cpp~~~~~~~
> #include <cstdlib>
> #include <iostream>
> #include <complex>
>
> int main(int argc, char** argv)
> {
> double a = 0;
> double b = 0;
> if (argc > 1)
> a = atof(argv[1]);
> if (argc > 2)
> b = atof(argv[2]);
> auto c = std::complex<double>(a, b);
> std::cout << std::abs(c) << std::endl;
> }
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> I build it with:
>
> ~~~~~~~~~building~~~~~~~
> $ g++ -g -O2 -o test test.cpp
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Then I get a "good" backtrace using GDB:
>
> ~~~~~~~~~gdb~~~~~~~~~~~~
> $ gdb ./test
> (gdb) break hypot
> Function "hypot" not defined.
> Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) y
> Breakpoint 1 (hypot) pending.
> (gdb) run
> Starting program: /tmp/test
>
> Breakpoint 1, 0x00007ffff776e910 in hypot () from /usr/lib/libm.so.6
> (gdb) bt
> #0 0x00007ffff776e910 in hypot () from /usr/lib/libm.so.6
> #1 0x00000000004007f4 in std::__complex_abs (__z=<optimized out>) at /usr/
> include/c++/6.2.1/complex:589
> #2 std::abs<double> (__z=<synthetic pointer>) at /usr/include/c++/6.2.1/
> complex:597
> #3 main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at test.cpp:14
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Note what inliners it reports for the address 0x00000000004007f4. Let's try
> bfd_find_inliner_info via eu-addr2line -i:
>
> ~~~~~~~~~eu-addr2line~~~
> eu-addr2line -i -a 0x00000000004007f4 -e ./test
> 0x00000000004007f4
> /usr/include/c++/6.2.1/ostream:221
> /tmp/test.cpp:14
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> This is wrong and seems to be off-by-one:
>
> ~~~~~~~~~eu-addr2line~~~
> eu-addr2line -i -a 0x00000000004007f3 -e ./test
> 0x00000000004007f3
> /usr/include/c++/6.2.1/complex:589
> /usr/include/c++/6.2.1/complex:597
> /tmp/test.cpp:14
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Can someone with more knowledge in this area sched some light on what is going
> on here please? Is it a bug, or is this fuzzy behavior and GDB happens to be
> better at guessing the "right" thing?
I don't know what gdb exactly displays as address in that backtrace.
It might display the return address, in which case subtracting 1 is the
right thing to do on x86_64 (that would be an approximation of the call
address, which is what you want).
And in fact that is what eu-stack does:
(gdb) gcore test.core
Saved corefile test.core
$ eu-stack -v --core test.core --exec test
PID 32623 - core
TID 32623:
#0 0x00007ffff77f8cf0 __hypot - libm.so.6
/usr/src/debug/glibc-2.17-c758a686/math/w_hypot.c:23
#1 0x0000000000400824 - 1 __complex_abs - test
/usr/include/c++/4.8.2/complex:587
#2 0x0000000000400824 - 1 abs<double> - test
/usr/include/c++/4.8.2/complex:595
#3 0x0000000000400824 - 1 main - test
/tmp/test.cpp:14
#4 0x00007ffff721db35 - 1 __libc_start_main - libc.so.6
../csu/libc-start.c:274
#5 0x000000000040088f - 1 _start - test
Cheers,
Mark
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-10-05 22:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-10-05 15:45 bfd_find_inliner_info reports different (wrong) information compared to GDB - off-by-one? Milian Wolff
2016-10-05 20:22 Mark Wielaard
2016-10-05 22:23 Milian Wolff
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).