* [Bug runtime/12566] usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64
2011-03-10 19:43 [Bug runtime/12566] New: usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64 dsmith at redhat dot com
@ 2011-03-11 21:02 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2011-03-11 21:29 ` mjw at redhat dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: dsmith at redhat dot com @ 2011-03-11 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12566
--- Comment #1 from David Smith <dsmith at redhat dot com> 2011-03-11 21:02:13 UTC ---
Here's some additional information.
In the 32-bit case (which works):
# eu-readelf -s usymbols-m32 | fgrep main_handler
62: 1000059c 4 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 12 main_handler
# fgrep main_handler /tmp/stapVlnORz/stap-symbols.h
{ 0x1000059c, "main_handler" },
The above is good, stap's value of the symbol matches up with eu-readelf's
value.
When run under gdb,
(gdb) p &main_handler
$2 = (void (*)(int)) 0x1000059c <main_handler>
That's good, gdb's idea of the symbol value also matches.
# fgrep /usymbols-m32 /proc/9161/maps
10000000-10010000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00 2239275
/root/ppc64/testsuite/usymbols-m32
10010000-10020000 rw-p 00000000 fd:00 2239275
/root/ppc64/testsuite/usymbols-m32
That's good, 0x1000059c exists within that first executable vma.
In the 64-bit case (which fails):
# eu-readelf -s usymbols-m64 | fgrep main_handler
63: 0000000010010c48 16 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 22 main_handler
# fgrep main_handler /tmp/stapImPRwN/stap-symbols.h
{ 0x10010c48, "main_handler" },
That's good, the eu-readelf and stap values match.
When run under gb,
(gdb) p &main_handler
$1 = (void (*)(int)) 0x10000700 <main_handler>
That's bad - when run, somehow the address has changed.
# fgrep /usymbols-m64 /proc/9183/maps
10000000-10010000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00 2239236
/root/ppc64/testsuite/usymbols-m64
10010000-10020000 rw-p 00000000 fd:00 2239236
/root/ppc64/testsuite/usymbols-m64
The 0x10010c48 address exists within that 2nd non-executable vma (the code in
vma.c only looks at executable vmas), which is why the symbol lookup code
fails. The gdb address (0x10000700) does exist within the 1st executable vma.
Perhaps there is some relocation going on that systemtap needs to know about.
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug runtime/12566] usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64
2011-03-10 19:43 [Bug runtime/12566] New: usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64 dsmith at redhat dot com
2011-03-11 21:02 ` [Bug runtime/12566] " dsmith at redhat dot com
@ 2011-03-11 21:29 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2011-08-25 2:49 ` phan at redhat dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: mjw at redhat dot com @ 2011-03-11 21:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12566
Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mjw at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com> 2011-03-11 21:29:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> In the 64-bit case (which fails):
>
> # eu-readelf -s usymbols-m64 | fgrep main_handler
> 63: 0000000010010c48 16 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 22 main_handler
> # fgrep main_handler /tmp/stapImPRwN/stap-symbols.h
> { 0x10010c48, "main_handler" },
>
> That's good, the eu-readelf and stap values match.
>
> When run under gb,
> (gdb) p &main_handler
> $1 = (void (*)(int)) 0x10000700 <main_handler>
>
> That's bad - when run, somehow the address has changed.
>
> # fgrep /usymbols-m64 /proc/9183/maps
> 10000000-10010000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00 2239236
> /root/ppc64/testsuite/usymbols-m64
> 10010000-10020000 rw-p 00000000 fd:00 2239236
> /root/ppc64/testsuite/usymbols-m64
>
> The 0x10010c48 address exists within that 2nd non-executable vma (the code in
> vma.c only looks at executable vmas), which is why the symbol lookup code
> fails. The gdb address (0x10000700) does exist within the 1st executable vma.
>
> Perhaps there is some relocation going on that systemtap needs to know about.
The 0x10010c48 address is a pointer into the .odp table. So it is an indirect
address to the real function address. We had a little discussion on making
systemtap deal with that better on the mailinglist:
http://sourceware.org/ml/systemtap/2011-q1/threads.html#00082
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug runtime/12566] usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64
2011-03-10 19:43 [Bug runtime/12566] New: usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64 dsmith at redhat dot com
2011-03-11 21:02 ` [Bug runtime/12566] " dsmith at redhat dot com
2011-03-11 21:29 ` mjw at redhat dot com
@ 2011-08-25 2:49 ` phan at redhat dot com
2017-10-11 10:44 ` mark at klomp dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: phan at redhat dot com @ 2011-08-25 2:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12566
han pingtian <phan at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |phan at redhat dot com
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug runtime/12566] usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64
2011-03-10 19:43 [Bug runtime/12566] New: usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64 dsmith at redhat dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-08-25 2:49 ` phan at redhat dot com
@ 2017-10-11 10:44 ` mark at klomp dot org
2017-10-11 10:48 ` mjw at fedoraproject dot org
2023-12-06 15:48 ` wcohen at redhat dot com
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: mark at klomp dot org @ 2017-10-11 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12566
Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mark at klomp dot org
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug runtime/12566] usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64
2011-03-10 19:43 [Bug runtime/12566] New: usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64 dsmith at redhat dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2017-10-11 10:44 ` mark at klomp dot org
@ 2017-10-11 10:48 ` mjw at fedoraproject dot org
2023-12-06 15:48 ` wcohen at redhat dot com
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: mjw at fedoraproject dot org @ 2017-10-11 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12566
Mark Wielaard <mjw at fedoraproject dot org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|mjw at fedoraproject dot org |
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug runtime/12566] usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64
2011-03-10 19:43 [Bug runtime/12566] New: usymbols.exp 64-bit test failing on ppc64 dsmith at redhat dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2017-10-11 10:48 ` mjw at fedoraproject dot org
@ 2023-12-06 15:48 ` wcohen at redhat dot com
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: wcohen at redhat dot com @ 2023-12-06 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12566
William Cohen <wcohen at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |wcohen at redhat dot com
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #3 from William Cohen <wcohen at redhat dot com> ---
This is currently working on RHEL8 andRHEL9 for both ppc64le and s390x.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread