From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 126168 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2016 18:26:58 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 126148 invoked by uid 89); 23 Jun 2016 18:26:57 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=pause, H*MI:sk:e5f466f, H*f:sk:e5f466f, H*i:sk:e5f466f X-HELO: mail-qk0-f179.google.com Received: from mail-qk0-f179.google.com (HELO mail-qk0-f179.google.com) (209.85.220.179) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 18:26:47 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f179.google.com with SMTP id t127so117715868qkf.1 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:26:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UXGShygqGTfUWzdLRKhUydpQQgm4yUTkWAC4CsYsAW4=; b=FVJdH5TkZZZejj7uPNwLAZHHIYBwxk2aNJgZPlar8L/mSdkGesUufw8CBgANZq3taB hnEnRa5Jhg+pFpTMqYTv+l9vZist3vXu2OIO9XEh8VdzvZsF5FxrDw+n72trGiQjsRf3 Qksm0g7yOa4N/KiQjsQ/BMxuKiWlQpf3cj5xvXEz6KruGJpPXP/VNnKdChX14Xpfc7bl wpbAHuxKpAaZmkUgfQfrXkkbSSwJbQw3aztJkByd+l2pAYeCArrrPy0OYgW/9t2rkbzR 0zr86wOgdcq173goyy34ZhWxoBP8ARoqCd4GFc406EVQ+5JWcZZVgmDhEYeLKX1oIs4g CCKw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKmnPxq2LeJTRYXXOAlPvptoxcz0UIOlCK/cS5J/AZAW80TgC3OydxT0oJnT9SgpWQH X-Received: by 10.237.39.167 with SMTP id a36mr31340106qtd.103.1466706404708; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.116] (pool-72-71-243-181.cncdnh.fast00.myfairpoint.net. [72.71.243.181]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id b63sm538436qkf.23.2016.06.23.11.26.42 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:26:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: exercising current aarch64 kprobe support with systemtap To: William Cohen , Pratyush Anand References: <8f40d0b9-5550-92f9-d1c5-8769f52304c0@redhat.com> <576B5501.1030106@linaro.org> Cc: systemtap@sourceware.org, Mark Brown , Jeremy Linton , David Smith From: David Long Message-ID: <576C29E1.8060805@linaro.org> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 18:26:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-q2/txt/msg00281.txt.bz2 On 06/23/2016 11:49 AM, William Cohen wrote: > On 06/22/2016 11:18 PM, David Long wrote: >> On 06/22/2016 04:24 PM, William Cohen wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> When running the current systemtap checked out from the git repository >>> and a locally built kernel with the kprobes64-v13 patches (the >>> test_upstream_arm64_devel branch of >>> https://github.com/pratyushanand/linux) on Fedora 23 machine one of >>> the kprobes_onthefly.exp tests is causing the machine to get in a >>> state that requires rebooting to fix. This can be triggered by running a >>> portion of the systemtap tests with: >>> >>> make installcheck RUNTESTFLAGS="--debug systemtap.onthefly/kprobes_onthefly.exp" >>> >>> When it gets to the kprobes_onthefly - otf_stress_max_iter_5000 test the >>> console starts spewing the following and needs to be rebooted: >>> >>> [23394.036860] Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1 >>> [23394.042434] Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1 >>> [23394.048008] Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1 >>> [23394.053541] Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1 >>> [23394.059053] Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1 >>> [23394.064545] Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1 >>> >>> Sorry I don't have the start of the failure it scrolled off the screen very quickly. >>> >>> -Will >>> >>> >> >> I'll take a look and see what I can figure out. >> >> In the meantime I did just push a v14 branch. I'm doubtful that it will address the above problem even though it contains a few bug fixes. >> >> -dl >> > > Hi Dave and Pratyush, > > I tried the kprobes64-v13 kernel and it also seems to work, so it lookw like the problem might be in the the > test_upstream_arm64_devel branch of https://github.com/pratyushanand/linux . > > -Will > I'm going to interpret that as meaning you know of no problem in the kprobes v14 patch that would give me pause to email it upstream. Do you disagree? -dl