Re: Wrong Perf Backtraces
ahmadkhorrami <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-users |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, Thanks. If you suggest the potentially bogus locations of the source code, I will give a try. Regards. On 2020-03-28 03:07, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 11:13:27PM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote: > >> Hi, >> I revised the code. Hopefully, it works. Could you check it with your >> own >> outputs? It is valuable for me to know if your output contains wrong >> backtraces or not. Here is the link: >> https://gofile.io/?c=rz2kGc > > will check, so far caught one.. might be same case: > > evince 2168454 1549196.055094: 43831 cycles:u: > ffffffffaec012f0 [unknown] ([unknown]) > 7f0dd44776b6 __mmap64+0x26 (inlined) > 7f0dd44776b6 __mmap64+0x26 (inlined) > > will try to investigate next week > > thanks, > jirka > > Regards. > > On 2020-03-27 15:34, ahmadkhorrami wrote: > > I do the following: > If this line is in the perf script backtrace: > 7f21ffe256db g_main_context_iteration+0x2b > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libglib-2.0.so.0.5600.4) > I run the following command: > gdb -batch -ex 'file /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libglib-2.0.so.0.5600.4' > -ex 'disass g_main_context_iteration'. > > Regards. > > On 2020-03-27 15:29, ahmadkhorrami wrote: > > Hi, > Thanks! Could you tell me what should be changed in order to make > the code runnable on your system, if it is possible? > Regards. > > On 2020-03-27 13:50, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:49:12PM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote: > > Hi, > Here is the link for the python script: > https://gofile.io/?c=1ZSLwe > It is written in python-3 and takes the perf script output as input. > It looks for consecutive repeated backtrace lines and checks if the > function > in these lines calls itself at the offset in the line (i.e., checks if > recursion is possible). If not possible it reports an error. Could > you check > to see if any error is detected in your outputs, please? > I'm getting tons of following output: > > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgtk-3.so.0.2200.30: No such file or > directory. > No symbol table is loaded. Use the "file" command. > 7ffff71b9bc1 gtk_css_node_invalidate_timestamp+0x31 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgtk-3.so.0.2200.30) > > I assume it's because I have all the dso binaries stored > under .biuldid path, while you check the output name > > jirka > > Regards. > On 2020-03-26 20:09, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 05:50:27PM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote: > > Hi, > First of all, many thanks for your time. Did you say that the first > file has > problems? > > The first file (http://gofile.io/?c=qk6oXv) has repeated gmallocn()s > while > the second (https://gofile.io/?c=oGxgSM) also has problems with > unmatched > (not necessarily repeated) function calls. I am not sure if the > kernel for > the second one is 5.4.7 or the generic Ubuntu kernel. But the first > one is > certainly 5.4.7. Just to be clear, there were many instances of these > unmatched <caller, callees>. > I can se all the files, but I just can't see the issue yet > but it's probably because of issues with perf archive.. > > let's see if somebody else can chime in > > I have a simple python script that checks for this situation. It > disassembles functions using GDB and checks the (directly called) > target of > each caller. I will put some comments in the script and upload it. > Could you > check to see if the python script detects any mismatches in your > backtraces? > It takes the perf script output file as input. I will upload the > script in > an hour. > ok > > jirka