From: "adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug runtime/14026] print_ubacktrace doesn't resolve the symbol name
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 14:44:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-14026-6586-FcXMR73fnx@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-14026-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14026
--- Comment #10 from Negreanu Adrian <adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com> 2012-05-02 14:44:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > The patch below made it work for me:
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/runtime/unwind.c b/runtime/unwind.c
> > index e440177..3ac7f8d 100644
> > --- a/runtime/unwind.c
> > +++ b/runtime/unwind.c
> > @@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ static int processCFI(const u8 *start, const u8 *end,
> > unsigned long targetLoc,
> > break;
> > }
> > dbug_unwind(1, "targetLoc=%lx state->loc=%lx\n", targetLoc,
> > state->loc);
> > - if (ptr.p8 > end)
> > + if (ptr.p8 >= end)
> > result = 0;
> > if (result && targetLoc != 0 && targetLoc < state->loc)
> > return 1;
>
> I am not sure that is correct. In principle ptr being equal to end should be
> fine (see also the last return condition in ProcessCFI). It means we read
> everything, the last instruction and arguments (and nothing more).
>
> If you hit this case then processCFI () will fail, which will make unwind_frame
> () also fail. So I am somewhat surprised this seems to work for you. Do you
> have debug output for before/after this patch?
You're right.
I used the wrong binary. Sorry for that !
The change that was included was:
if (result && targetLoc != 0 && targetLoc < state->loc)
- return 1;
+ //return 1;
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-02 14:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-27 10:00 [Bug runtime/14026] New: " adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-04-27 10:02 ` [Bug runtime/14026] " adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-04-27 10:03 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-04-27 13:51 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-04-27 13:57 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-04-27 15:23 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-04-27 15:39 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-05-02 13:22 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-05-02 14:06 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-02 14:30 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-05-02 14:33 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-05-02 14:44 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com [this message]
2012-05-02 14:49 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-02 15:34 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-02 15:38 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-02 19:56 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-03 9:55 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-04 13:11 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-05-04 13:51 ` adrian.m.negreanu at intel dot com
2012-05-06 12:43 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 12:44 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 12:45 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 12:46 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 12:47 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 12:47 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 12:48 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 13:09 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 19:39 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 21:16 ` fche at redhat dot com
2012-05-06 21:31 ` fche at redhat dot com
2012-05-07 8:43 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-05-07 13:45 ` [Bug runtime/14026] inode based uprobes " mjw at redhat dot com
2012-07-19 14:53 ` fche at redhat dot com
2012-07-23 5:57 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-07-23 8:26 ` Mark Wielaard
2012-07-23 9:35 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-07-19 20:56 ` [Bug runtime/14026] inode-uprobes should compute proper SET_REG_IP before probe invocation fche at redhat dot com
2012-07-26 22:09 ` fche at redhat dot com
2012-08-14 21:55 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2012-08-14 22:10 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2012-08-14 22:20 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-08-14 22:28 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-08-15 14:09 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2012-08-15 14:14 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2012-08-15 14:25 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2012-08-15 15:12 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-14026-6586-FcXMR73fnx@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
--cc=systemtap@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).