From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 18 11:21:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83A1437B401; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 11:21:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl (prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl [194.29.178.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F2B43FA3; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 11:21:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from P.Dawidek@prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl) Received: from localhost (localhost.mini.pw.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) by prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0DB243C8; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:21:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl (Postfix, from userid 1091) id 396A9243C6; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:21:16 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:21:16 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek To: Terry Lambert Message-ID: <20030718182115.GD84740@prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl> References: <20030715223653.Y36933-100000@mail.econolodgetulsa.com> <20030718080659.GA26490@garage.freebsd.pl> <3F17B3AE.1FD5CAC6@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F17B3AE.1FD5CAC6@mindspring.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-PGP-Key-URL: http://garage.freebsd.pl/jules.pgp X-OS: FreeBSD 4.8-STABLE i386 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS (prioris) cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: Robert Watson Subject: Re: running 5.1-RELEASE with no procfs mounted (lockups?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:21:27 -0000 On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 01:45:34AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: +> > +> truss Relies on the event model of procfs; there have been some +> > +> initial patches and discussion of migrating truss to ptrace() but +> > +> I don't think we have anything very usable yet. I'd be happy to +> > +> be corrected on this. :-) +> > +> > Hmm, why to change this behaviour? Is there any functionality that +> > ktrace(1) doesn't provide? +> +> It can interactively run in another window, giving you realtime +> updates on what's happening up to the point of a kernel crash. +> With ktrace, you are relatively screwed. Hmm, you're talking about: # ktrace -p # kdump -l ? +> Another good example is that it dump out information that ktrace +> can't, because of where it synchronizes. Some people recently +> have been seeing "EAGAIN" when they haven't expected it, with +> the process exiting immediately after that, with no real clue +> as to where in the code it's happening (e.g. which system call); +> truss will show this, if run in another terminal window, but +> ktrace will not (yes, I know it should; it doesn't. If you can't +> reconcile this with how you think ktrace should work, then fix it). Note, that I'm not for removing truss(1). I'm only saying that in most cases ktrace(1) is sufficient. You can always mount procfs in those special situations. -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek pawel@dawidek.net UNIX Systems Programmer/Administrator http://garage.freebsd.pl Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! http://cerber.sourceforge.net