From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21456 invoked by alias); 28 Nov 2006 16:34:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 21444 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Nov 2006 16:34:26 -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, 28 Nov 2006 16:34:21 +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 kASGYJUP004828 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:34:19 -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 kASGYIPG021339; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:34:19 -0500 Received: from [10.13.248.69] (vpn-248-69.boston.redhat.com [10.13.248.69]) by pobox.hsv.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id kASGYH9t009816; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:34:17 -0500 Message-ID: <456C6508.1030805@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 23:57:00 -0000 From: David Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061107) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Mason CC: Martin Hunt , systemtap@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Sockets tapset and script References: <455E3718.8030202@us.ibm.com> <1164129641.27146.33.camel@dragon> <456B7722.8060305@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <456B7722.8060305@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-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q4/txt/msg00547.txt.bz2 Mike Mason wrote: > Martin Hunt wrote: >> On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 14:26 -0800, Mike Mason wrote: >> Since yesterday, we can now access parameters in return probes (BZ >> 1382). This could simplify some of your script because yo no longer need >> to cache parameters on entry probes and then lookup their values in the >> return probe. > > Based on later posts, I assume this still doesn't work and I shouldn't > remove the parameter caching in my script just yet. > Please confirm if this is true. Accessing target variables in return probes currently works, for some applications. There are two major outstanding bugs: (1) The current code can get confused and fail to find the cached parameters if two different threads intersperse function entries/exits. I should have this one fixed late today or early tomorrow. (2) Accessing the target variables in a loop is broken. A workaround is to assign the target variable to a temp variable before the loop and then use the temp variable in the loop. This one is going to require some re-architecture work, so I'm unsure when it will get fixed. -- David Smith dsmith@redhat.com Red Hat http://www.redhat.com 256.217.0141 (direct) 256.837.0057 (fax)