* [Bug tapsets/6762] Some syscalls functions just wrappers for other syscalls
[not found] <bug-6762-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2015-03-17 18:28 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: dsmith at redhat dot com @ 2015-03-17 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6762
David Smith <dsmith at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #5 from David Smith <dsmith at redhat dot com> ---
(In reply to Frank Ch. Eigler from comment #4)
> This problem periodically reoccurs; we will have to deal with it
> properly. See bug #11263.
As part of all the syscall tapset work that's been done recently (bug #16716),
a fix to avoid syscall nesting has been developed (originally for bug #15219).
This fix involves use of the @__syscall_gate() family of macros. This fix
basically says if we're in syscall.faccessat, but the syscall number isn't
__NR_faccessat, return.
Every known instance of this problem has been fixed. It is likely there are
problems with syscalls without a test program. We'll have to tackle these as we
continue work in this area.
I'm going mark this bug as resolved, and we'll just file individual bugs on
syscalls without test programs and fix nesting problems then.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug tapsets/6762] Some syscalls functions just wrappers for other syscalls
2008-07-23 21:20 [Bug tapsets/6762] New: " wcohen at redhat dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-13 21:02 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
@ 2010-02-16 20:05 ` fche at redhat dot com
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: fche at redhat dot com @ 2010-02-16 20:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
------- Additional Comments From fche at redhat dot com 2010-02-16 20:04 -------
This problem periodically reoccurs; we will have to deal with it
properly. See bug #11263.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6762
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug tapsets/6762] Some syscalls functions just wrappers for other syscalls
2008-07-23 21:20 [Bug tapsets/6762] New: " wcohen at redhat dot com
2008-10-20 16:52 ` [Bug tapsets/6762] " fche at redhat dot com
2008-10-20 18:54 ` mjw at redhat dot com
@ 2010-01-13 21:02 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2010-02-16 20:05 ` fche at redhat dot com
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: dsmith at redhat dot com @ 2010-01-13 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
------- Additional Comments From dsmith at redhat dot com 2010-01-13 21:02 -------
Since these failures no longer occur on current Red Hat Enterprise
Linux 5 (2.6.18-164.el5), I'm closing this one.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dsmith at redhat dot com
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6762
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug tapsets/6762] Some syscalls functions just wrappers for other syscalls
2008-07-23 21:20 [Bug tapsets/6762] New: " wcohen at redhat dot com
2008-10-20 16:52 ` [Bug tapsets/6762] " fche at redhat dot com
@ 2008-10-20 18:54 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2010-01-13 21:02 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2010-02-16 20:05 ` fche at redhat dot com
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: mjw at redhat dot com @ 2008-10-20 18:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
------- Additional Comments From mjw at redhat dot com 2008-10-20 18:53 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> Alternately, one can kludge the test case to accept and ignore such
> nesting. :-(
I actually did this a while ago:
commit 5311c037f83f66967f9de4cc66815f93940bb005
Author: Mark Wielaard <mjw@redhat.com>
Date: Sun Oct 5 00:29:49 2008 +0200
Expect syscall faccessat, fchmodat, linkat, symlinkat, readlinkat chain-call
diff --git a/testsuite/systemtap.syscall/ChangeLog b/testsuite/systemtap.syscall
index 772f980..7cb97df 100644
--- a/testsuite/systemtap.syscall/ChangeLog
+++ b/testsuite/systemtap.syscall/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+2008-10-04 Mark Wielaard <mjw@redhat.com>
+
+ * access.c: sys_access() calls through to sys_faccessat().
+ * chmod.c: sys_chmod() calls through to sys_fchmodat().
+ * link.c: sys_link() calls through to sys_linkat(),
+ sys_symlink() calls through to sys_symlinkat(),
+ sys_readlink() calls through to sys_readlinkat().
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6762
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug tapsets/6762] Some syscalls functions just wrappers for other syscalls
2008-07-23 21:20 [Bug tapsets/6762] New: " wcohen at redhat dot com
@ 2008-10-20 16:52 ` fche at redhat dot com
2008-10-20 18:54 ` mjw at redhat dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: fche at redhat dot com @ 2008-10-20 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: systemtap
------- Additional Comments From fche at redhat dot com 2008-10-20 16:50 -------
One possible fix is to extend the syscalls tapset thusly:
# add someplace
global syscall_inplay
probe process.syscall { syscall_inplay[tid()] = $syscall }
probe process.syscall.return { delete syscall_inplay[tid()] }
probe process.thread.end { delete syscall_inplay[tid()] }
# then for each "nestable" system call handler
probe syscall.faccessat = kernel.function(" ...") {
if (syscall_inplay[tid()]) next;
}
Alternately, one can instrument just the "nester" and "nestee" probe
pairs with similar logic, without general system-wide utrace syscall
probes.
Alternately, one can kludge the test case to accept and ignore such
nesting. :-(
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6762
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-03-17 18:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-6762-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
2015-03-17 18:28 ` [Bug tapsets/6762] Some syscalls functions just wrappers for other syscalls dsmith at redhat dot com
2008-07-23 21:20 [Bug tapsets/6762] New: " wcohen at redhat dot com
2008-10-20 16:52 ` [Bug tapsets/6762] " fche at redhat dot com
2008-10-20 18:54 ` mjw at redhat dot com
2010-01-13 21:02 ` dsmith at redhat dot com
2010-02-16 20:05 ` fche at redhat dot com
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).