Re: Systemtap snap:b6371390 test on kernel 2.6.30-rc3-git2

[Pavan Naregundi <pavan.naregundi@in.ibm.com>]

Mark Wielaard <mjw@redhat.com> wrote on 04/27/2009 08:12:50 PM:

> From:
>
> Mark Wielaard <mjw@redhat.com>
>
> To:
>
> Pavan Naregundi/India/IBM@IBMIN
>
> Cc:
>
> systemtap@sourceware.org
>
> Date:
>
> 04/27/2009 08:10 PM
>
> Subject:
>
> Re: Systemtap snap:b6371390 test on kernel 2.6.30-rc3-git2
>
> Hi Pavan,
>
> On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 17:17 +0530, Pavan Naregundi wrote:
> > Results of systemtap snap:b6371390 test on kernel 2.6.30-rc3-git2
> > Arch: ppc64
> >
> > Please contact me, for any other details.
>
> Thanks for testing this combination. Which elfutils version did you use?

It is elfutils-0.141.tar.bz2..

>
> > Unexpected failures
> > =============================
> > FAIL: LOCAL1 (0)
>
> I have seen this fail sporadically, is it failing always for you?
>
> > FAIL: STRUCT1 (0)
>
> Could you post the relevant part of the testsuite/systemtap.log?
>
> > FAIL: backtrace (1 0)
> > FAIL: backtrace-unwindsyms (1 0)
>
> This is http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6961
> "backtrace from non-pt_regs probe context"
>
> > FAIL: systemtap.base/cast.stp
> > FAIL: debugpath-bad (eof)
> > FAIL: debugpath-good (eof)
>
> Could you post the relevant parts of the testsuite/systemtap.log for the
> above failures?
>
> > FAIL: gtod (9)
>
> This is probably http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5094
> "gtod.exp fails on ppc64/i386"
>
> > FAIL: MAXACTIVE01 compilation
> > FAIL: MAXACTIVE02 compilation
> > FAIL: conditional probes (0)
> > FAIL: OVERLOAD1 compilation
> > FAIL: OVERLOAD2 compilation
> > FAIL: OVERLOAD3 compilation
>
> Could you post the relevant parts of the testsuite/systemtap.log for the
> above failures?
>
> > FAIL: compiling sdt.c ""
> > FAIL: compiling sdt.c additional_flags=-std=gnu89
> > FAIL: compiling sdt.c additional_flags=-ansi
> > FAIL: compiling sdt.c additional_flags=-pedantic
> > FAIL: compiling sdt.c additional_flags=-ansi additional_flags=-pedantic
> > FAIL: compiling sdt.c additional_flags=-O2
> > FAIL: compiling sdt.c additional_flags="-O3"
> > FAIL: static_uprobes compiling C -g
>
> That probably means the sdt.h header doesn't compile on ppc.
> Could you see if testsuite/systemtap.log gives more hints about what is
> wrong? What gcc version are you using?
>
> > FAIL: stmtvars - .function
> > FAIL: system_func (0,0,0)
>
> Could you post the relevant parts of the testsuite/systemtap.log for the
> above failures?
>
> > FAIL: backtrace of yyy_func2 (1)
> > FAIL: print_stack of yyy_func2 (1)
> > FAIL: backtrace of yyy_func3 (1)
> > FAIL: print_stack of yyy_func3 (1)
> > FAIL: backtrace of yyy_func4 (1)
> > FAIL: print_stack of yyy_func4 (1)
>
> These might need support for the dwarf unwinder on ppc to provide more
> accurate backtraces.
> http://sourceware.org/ml/systemtap/2009-q2/msg00307.html
>
> > FAIL: integer function arguments -- numeric
> > FAIL: unsigned function arguments -- numeric
> > FAIL: long function arguments -- numeric
> > FAIL: int64 function arguments -- numeric
> > FAIL: char function arguments -- numeric
> > FAIL: string function arguments -- numeric
> > FAIL: integer function arguments -- numeric --kelf --ignore-dwarf
> > FAIL: unsigned function arguments -- numeric --kelf --ignore-dwarf
> > FAIL: long function arguments -- numeric --kelf --ignore-dwarf
> > FAIL: int64 function arguments -- numeric --kelf --ignore-dwarf
> > FAIL: char function arguments -- numeric --kelf --ignore-dwarf
> > FAIL: string function arguments -- numeric --kelf --ignore-dwarf
>
> Could you post the relevant parts of the testsuite/systemtap.log for the
> above failures?
>
> > FAIL: systemtap.examples/general/para-callgraph build
> > FAIL: systemtap.examples/general/para-callgraph run
>
> Likewise.
>
> > FAIL: buildok/maxactive01.stp
> > FAIL: buildok/signal-all-probes.stp
> > FAIL: buildok/thirteen.stp
> > FAIL: semok/thirtytwo.stp
> > FAIL: semok/twentyeight.stp
> > FAIL: semok/twentyfour.stp
> > FAIL: semok/twentynine.stp
> > FAIL: semok/twentyseven.stp
> > FAIL: systemtap.printf/bin6.stp
> > FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp shutdown (eof)
>
>
> Some of these might be solved with an updated elfutils (0.141). At least
> that was the case for s390.
>
> > FAIL: 64-bit acct
> > FAIL: 64-bit net1
> > FAIL: 64-bit readwrite
> > FAIL: 64-bit signal
> > FAIL: 32-bit acct
> > FAIL: 32-bit net1
> > FAIL: 32-bit readwrite
> > FAIL: 32-bit signal
> > FAIL: 32-bit statfs
>
> The net1 failures are
> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6991
> "accept system call missed on 2.6.27"
>
> For the others look in the systemtap.log file and/or try running the
> tests in testsuite/systemtap.syscall by hand. There is a README there
> explaining how the tests work and how to use the tcl framework to see
> how things should match.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark
>