From: "dsmith at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/17155] New: systemtap.examples/profiling/functioncallcount.stp failures on x86_64
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:54:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-17155-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17155
Bug ID: 17155
Summary: systemtap.examples/profiling/functioncallcount.stp
failures on x86_64
Product: systemtap
Version: unspecified
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: testsuite
Assignee: systemtap at sourceware dot org
Reporter: dsmith at redhat dot com
When I run the systemtap.examples/check.exp testcase (which tests all the
examples), the functioncallcount.stp example fails about half the time on
x86_64. When it fails, I see this in systemtap.log:
====
ERROR: probe overhead exceeded threshold
WARNING: Number of errors: 1, skipped probes: 0
WARNING: /usr/local/bin/staprun exited with status: 1
Pass 5: run failed. [man error::pass5]
child process exited abnormally
RC 1
FAIL: systemtap.examples/profiling/functioncallcount run
====
The guts of functioncallcount.stp look like:
====
probe kernel.function(@1).call { # probe functions listed on commandline
called[probefunc()] <<< 1 # add a count efficiently
}
global called
probe end {
foreach (fn in called-) # Sort by call count (in decreasing order)
# (fn+ in called) # Sort by function name
printf("%s %d\n", fn, @count(called[fn]))
exit()
}
====
Because of bug #13693, probefunc() was rewritten and now has a higher overhead.
If we switch to ppfunc(), this example script should work more often.
(The use of the new probefunc() may also be contributing to bug #17140)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
next reply other threads:[~2014-07-14 13:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-14 13:54 dsmith at redhat dot com [this message]
2014-07-14 15:02 ` [Bug testsuite/17155] " 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-17155-6586@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).