From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29687 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2006 19:25:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 29678 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Nov 2006 19:25:49 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 19:25:45 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id kAEJPg99019069; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 14:25:42 -0500 Received: from pobox.hsv.redhat.com (pobox.hsv.redhat.com [172.16.16.12]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id kAEJPfp2031273; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 14:25:42 -0500 Received: from [172.16.17.170] (dhcp-170.hsv.redhat.com [172.16.17.170]) by pobox.hsv.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id kAEJPfTr023343; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 14:25:41 -0500 Message-ID: <455A17EC.8090002@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 19:47:00 -0000 From: David Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061107) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Wilder CC: Systemtap List Subject: Re: S390x - REL5 stap_testing_200611132049.results] References: <45590329.5080606@us.ibm.com> <4559BAFB.8010008@redhat.com> <4559F3FD.1000206@us.ibm.com> <4559F558.6010108@redhat.com> <455A14E2.3020901@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <455A14E2.3020901@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q4/txt/msg00428.txt.bz2 David Wilder wrote: > David Smith wrote: > >> >> Something *really* strange is going on there. The above output (and >> the part that I cut out) shows that stap didn't do pass 4 for any of >> the cache tests. That's really odd, since "stap -p4" is hardcoded in >> that test. >> >> Can you run the following command *twice* and send me the output? >> >> # stap -v -p4 -e "probe begin {}" >> >> The output should look something like: >> >> --------------- >> # stap -v -p4 -e "probe begin {}" >> Pass 1: parsed user script and 53 library script(s) in >> 140usr/10sys/165real ms. >> Pass 2: analyzed script: 1 probe(s), 0 function(s), 0 embed(s), 0 >> global(s) in 10usr/10sys/3real ms. >> Pass 3: translated to C into >> "/tmp/stapGSMvEZ/stap_7a5fe045c67645c83d0df1d327d2de1c_122.c" in >> 0usr/0sys/0real ms. >> Pass 4: compiled C into "stap_7a5fe045c67645c83d0df1d327d2de1c_122.ko" >> in 880usr/140sys/2566real ms. >> # stap -v -p4 -e "probe begin {}" >> Pass 1: parsed user script and 53 library script(s) in >> 140usr/20sys/490real ms. >> Pass 2: analyzed script: 1 probe(s), 0 function(s), 0 embed(s), 0 >> global(s) in 10usr/0sys/3real ms. >> Pass 3: using cached >> /home/dsmith/.systemtap/cache/7a/stap_7a5fe045c67645c83d0df1d327d2de1c_122.c >> >> Pass 4: using cached >> /home/dsmith/.systemtap/cache/7a/stap_7a5fe045c67645c83d0df1d327d2de1c_122.ko >> >> --------------- >> > Pass 4 is giving an error, odd that it did not show up in the test > log. Here it is: > [....] > mp/stapuYgXg9/.tmp_stap_9001.o /tmp/stapuYgXg9/stap_9001.c > In file included from /usr/local/share/systemtap/runtime/runtime.h:79, > from /tmp/stapuYgXg9/stap_9001.c:31: > /usr/local/share/systemtap/runtime/alloc.c:66: error: expected > declaration specifiers or '...' before '(' token > /usr/local/share/systemtap/runtime/alloc.c: In function 'percpu_free': > /usr/local/share/systemtap/runtime/alloc.c:67: error: number of > arguments doesn't match prototype > include/linux/percpu.h:51: error: prototype declaration > [...] > > From runtime/alloc.c > [...] > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > [...] > 66: void _stp_free_percpu(const void *objp) > { > int i; > struct percpu_data *p = (struct percpu_data *) (~(unsigned long) > objp); > > for_each_cpu(i) > kfree(p->ptrs[i]); > kfree(p); > } > > But earler in alloc.c _stp_free_percpu() is defined: > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > #define _stp_free_percpu(ptr) free_percpu(ptr) > #else > #define _stp_free_percpu(ptr) kfree(ptr) > #endif > > I think the #ifdefs are messed up. Both defines are under CONFIG_SMP. > If I comment out the first defines it works better, but I am still net > seeing the > "using cached " message. > > root@hez235 testing]# stap -v -p4 -e "probe begin {}" > Pass 1: parsed user script and 52 library script(s) in > 1410usr/90sys/1617real ms. > Pass 2: analyzed script: 1 probe(s), 0 function(s), 0 global(s) in > 20usr/0sys/25real ms. > Pass 3: translated to C into "/tmp/stapAeJiJi/stap_9300.c" in > 780usr/2750sys/3863real ms. > Pass 4: compiled C into "stap_9300.ko" in 9440usr/1950sys/12946real ms. > [root@hez235 testing]# stap -v -p4 -e "probe begin {}" > Pass 1: parsed user script and 52 library script(s) in > 1410usr/90sys/1615real ms. > Pass 2: analyzed script: 1 probe(s), 0 function(s), 0 global(s) in > 20usr/0sys/27real ms. > Pass 3: translated to C into "/tmp/stapsDZD66/stap_9388.c" in > 770usr/2760sys/4103real ms. > Pass 4: compiled C into "stap_9388.ko" in 9470usr/1960sys/12527real ms. > Hmm. It appears from that output that the 'stap' binary you are using doesn't have caching support. If it did, the name of the C file wouldn't be 'stap_9388.c', it would be something like 'stap_6bc3d92354bbb164201d174128e2eca5_122.c'. Can you check and ensure that the latest systemtap has been compiled and installed? Let's see the output of "stap -V". -- David Smith dsmith@redhat.com Red Hat http://www.redhat.com 256.217.0141 (direct) 256.837.0057 (fax)