Re: Wrong Perf Backtraces

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 03:39:31AM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote:
> An here is the second one:
> https://gofile.io/?c=oGxgSM

thanks, so far I don't see that, but I think it's because
the 'inline' code does not resolve the libc dso correctly,
CC-ing few other folks..

so I'm able to get:

	EvJobScheduler 17382 13006.872877:      10000 mem_load_uops_retired.l3_miss:uppp:     7fffd2e06588         5080022 N/A|SNP N/A|TLB N/A|LCK N/A
		    7ffff4b04c74 [unknown] (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.27.so)
		    7ffff4b072ec malloc+0x27c (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.27.so)
		    7fffd9872ddd gmalloc+0xd (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpoppler.so.73.0.0)
		    7fffd9873391 copyString+0x11 (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpoppler.so.73.0.0)

while you see:

	EvJobScheduler 17382 13006.872877:      10000 mem_load_uops_retired.l3_miss:uppp:     7fffd2e06588         5080022 N/A|SNP N/A|TLB N/A|LCK N/A
		    7ffff4b04c74 _int_malloc+0x9a4 (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.27.so)
		    7ffff4b072ec __GI___libc_malloc+0x27c (inlined)
		    7fffd9872ddd gmalloc+0xd (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpoppler.so.73.0.0)
		    7fffd9872ddd gmalloc+0xd (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpoppler.so.73.0.0)

so for some reason I don't resolve 7ffff4b04c74, which might
be the reason I don't see the following address twice as you do:

	    7fffd9872ddd gmalloc+0xd (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpoppler.so.73.0.0)
	    7fffd9872ddd gmalloc+0xd (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpoppler.so.73.0.0)

the previous field (7ffff4b072ec) is resolved by the
'inline' code, so I wonder it's related

I needed to make some changes to utils/srcline.c to be able
to properly open dso via buildid cache, I pushed it to:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jolsa/perf.git
  perf/callchain

here are the steps to get above output:

  download perf.data and perf archive data from:
    https://gofile.io/?c=o95O7N
    http://gofile.io/?c=qk6oXv

  $ unxz ./perf.data.xz
  $ tar xvf perf.data.tar.bz2 -C ~/.debug

compile perf from aobve tree/branch and run:

  $ perf script -i perf.data

I think we might be missing some libraries in 'perf archive'
by not following debug_link section, will check on this

jirka


> Regards
> On 2020-03-26 02:51, ahmadkhorrami wrote:
> 
> > Here is the link for the gmallocn()s:
> > http://gofile.io/?c=qk6oXv
> > I will send the second one as soon as the upload is finished:
> > 
> > Regards.
> > 
> > On 2020-03-26 02:16, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 02:07:39AM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote:
> > 
> > Here is the link for the gmallocn() case:
> > https://gofile.io/?c=o95O7N
> > The output for the second case is big. I have a small one produced
> > several
> > days ago the link of which is as follows:
> > https://gofile.io/?c=OIPCjx
> > looking good, but I still need you t run 'perf archive' on top of your
> > data and send me the perf.data.tar.bz2 it generates, like:
> > 
> > [jolsa@krava perf]$ sudo ./perf record
> > ^C[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> > [ perf record: Captured and wrote 1.675 MB perf.data (6248 samples) ]
> > 
> > [jolsa@krava perf]$ sudo ./perf archive
> > Now please run:
> > 
> > $ tar xvf perf.data.tar.bz2 -C ~/.debug
> > 
> > wherever you need to run 'perf report' on.
> > 
> > I need that perf.data.tar.bz2 generated from your data
> > 
> > thanks,
> > jirka
> > 
> > Regards.
> > 
> > On 2020-03-26 01:39, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 22:02:52 +0100
> > Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > yea, no luck.. so if you could generate some reasonable small
> > perf.data that
> > shows the issue and send it over together with 'perf archive' data
> > privately
> > to me and to whoever else ask for it, so we don't polute the list..
> > Right. And it may be better if you compress it too.
> > 
> > xz perf.data
> > 
> > and attach the perf.data.xz (and only privately send it to Mr. Olsa).
> > 
> > -- Steve
> > 
> > or if you could put it somewhere on the web/ftp.. that'd be best
>