From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8238 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2010 20:26:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 8215 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Feb 2010 20:26:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-gy0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-gy0-f169.google.com) (209.85.160.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:26:13 +0000 Received: by gyf3 with SMTP id 3so1559613gyf.0 for ; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 12:26:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.62.11 with SMTP id k11mr3139285ana.175.1267388771414; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 12:26:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.72.37.94? ([166.205.8.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4sm854145ywi.51.2010.02.28.12.26.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 28 Feb 2010 12:26:10 -0800 (PST) References: <4B1FE14D.5070307@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4B685611.5090402@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4B7C30CF.6070808@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4B8A3E2B.1030706@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-Id: From: Ahmed Taha To: Anithra P Janakiraman In-Reply-To: <4B8A3E2B.1030706@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7D11) Subject: Re: [RFC] Framework for easy distribution of SystemTap scripts. Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:26:00 -0000 Cc: "systemtap@sourceware.org" 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: 2010-q1/txt/msg00548.txt.bz2 Hi, Please help me understand the jump that had just happened. What you are saying is that to troubleshoot an abnormality or a kernel hanging or a softlock due to a random process or a stateless nfsv4 hanging- kernel, I do NOT have to install a release-specific systemtap rpm with its debug info kernel, but all what I do now is to generate the systemtap rpm customized to a certain config parameters Provided I have already initial snapshots of systemtap runs on another machine ? Thanks, --Ahmed On Feb 28, 2010, at 3:58, Anithra P Janakiraman wrote: > Hi, > > Please do let me know if there are any concerns/suggestions with the > distribution framework. > We are thinking a man page would not be necessary as usage is > trivial. Let me know if it is needed ((README has been included). > > Regards, > Anithra. > > > > > On 02/17/2010 11:39 PM, Anithra P Janakiraman wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I've attached a modified framework. The systemtap_pkg_generator now >> generates a package that includes staprun,stapio, an install script >> and >> the generated kernel module. The files are not packaged into an >> rpm, and >> no installation happens. The resulting 'package' is a self-extracting >> binary file that extracts all files to the current dir, invokes the >> install script which in turn invokes staprun from the current dir. >> This >> binary file can only be executed by root users. >> >> Please comment. >> >> Regards, >> Anithra. >> >> >> On 02/02/2010 10:12 PM, Anithra P Janakiraman wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've attached a modified framework. The names of the template/config >>> files have been changed(no change in functionality). I've >>> attempted to >>> keeps the names compatible with other scripts in the SystemTap >>> package. >>> We would like to keep the framework in a seperate directory >>> (similar to >>> the initscript dir) for the sake of simplicity. (called >>> distribution-framework or distribution-fw?) >>> >>> The directory would contain the following >>> template.specfile >>> template.install >>> template.binextractor >>> config.rpmoptions >>> systemtap-rpm-generator (This is the executable script) >>> README >>> >>> >>> Let me know if any changes are needed (names of files/directory or >>> contents). If there is any naming convention that i should adhere to >>> please let me know. If there are no concerns, or suggestions i would >>> like to go ahead and commit the framework. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Anithra >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12/09/2009 11:11 PM, Anithra P Janakiraman wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> We've been looking at a simplified distribution framework for >>>> SystemTap >>>> scripts that : >>>> 1. packages a set of systemtap scripts and dependent >>>> tapsets in a form that circumvents , as much as possible the need >>>> for >>>> external dependencies(like kernel-debuginfo) >>>> 2. installs, runs the script, post processes the output and >>>> uninstalls >>>> out of the box >>>> >>>> We feel this would be especially useful in scenarios where support >>>> admins wish to run a particular set of script(s) on a machine for >>>> debug >>>> or monitoring purposes. I'm attaching an rpm-based framework that >>>> does >>>> the following: >>>> 1. Compiles a set of scripts into a set of kernel modules >>>> on another machine of identical architecture that has SystemTap >>>> installed and running >>>> 2. Creates an rpm on the fly that would consist of >>>> i) kernel modules ii) staprun & stapio taken from the systemtap- >>>> runtime >>>> package in the machine that has SystemTap installed, iii) post >>>> processing script to process the output(optional) >>>> 3. Bundles the above >>>> rpm with an install script that has options to i) install the rpm >>>> ii) >>>> run / stop iii) uninstall iv) all of the above. >>>> 4 . The rpm and the >>>> install script are packaged into a self-extracting binary that >>>> would >>>> extract itself and execute 1 of the four steps above. >>>> >>>> The framework would mainly consist of >>>> 1. rpm-generating script >>>> (rpm-generator.sh) that does all of the above >>>> 2. spec file template that >>>> will be modified by the rpm-generator on the fly and used to >>>> build the >>>> rpm >>>> 3. install script template that will be modified by the >>>> rpm-generator and bundled with the rpm >>>> 4. Configuration file - that >>>> would specify the location of the scripts/tapsets >>>> >>>> The rpm is packaged as a self extracting binary for ease of use. >>>> When >>>> the binary is executed it extracts the rpm package and based on the >>>> parameters provided either installs/runs/uninstalls the rpm. Help >>>> detailing the available options are also provided >>>> >>>> USAGE: [options] [parameters] >>>> >>>> Options: >>>> * --install -i Install the tapset rpm. >>>> * --run -r Runs the scripts >>>> for n minutes where n can be passed as a parameter. o The default >>>> value >>>> is 10 minutes. Post processing is performed after the script >>>> completes. >>>> * --start -s Invokes the script as a background process. >>>> * --stop -x Stops the script and performs post processing. >>>> * --uninstall -u Stops the script if running and uninstalls the >>>> rpm. >>>> * --all Installs the rpm, runs the scrip, processes the output and >>>> uninstalls the rpm. >>>> * --help Displays this usage text. >>>> >>>> Parameters: >>>> >>>> * time=[x] x is in minutes. Runs the script for x minutes. valid >>>> for >>>> --run(-r) o --start(-s) or --all(-a) options only >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> One disadvantage of the above framework is that the end binary >>>> that is >>>> created is tied to a particular kernel version/architecture. >>>> However the >>>> users now need not install systemtap, debuginfo and need not even >>>> be >>>> familiar with SystemTap. This should help users and admins who >>>> wish to >>>> run a set of scripts to solve a specific problem(maybe on a >>>> customer's >>>> machine). >>>> >>>> Please comment, >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Anithra. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > >