From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 6 12:13:57 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 619B316A415; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 12:13:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE5FA13C458; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 12:13:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22CEA47651; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 07:13:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 12:13:55 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Peter Jeremy In-Reply-To: <20070106043515.GD839@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20070106121154.A46119@fledge.watson.org> References: <200701052104.l05L4cO7037092@repoman.freebsd.org> <200701051607.59334.jhb@freebsd.org> <20070106043515.GD839@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, John Baldwin Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/kdump kdump.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 12:13:57 -0000 On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On Fri, 2007-Jan-05 16:07:58 -0500, John Baldwin wrote: >> On Friday 05 January 2007 16:04, John Baldwin wrote: >>> jhb 2007-01-05 21:04:37 UTC >>> >>> FreeBSD src repository >>> >>> Modified files: >>> usr.bin/kdump kdump.c >>> Log: >>> Add code to parse the utrace(2) entries generated by malloc(3) in a more >>> human-readable format. Note that we report 'realloc(p, 0)' as 'free(p)' >>> since both cases are encoded the same way and 'free()' is more common >>> than a realloc() to 0. >>> >>> MFC after: 1 week > > This is much nicer than having to run kdump output thru my perl script to do > this. The only downside I see is that the code in kdump assumes that any > utrace records that are sizeof(struct utrace_malloc) are generated by > malloc. This isn't necessarily true - whilst nothing in the base system > apart from malloc currently uses utrace, it's possible that people are using > utrace in their own code. I'd prefer to see this decoding controlled by a > command line option. (Ideally, kdump would grow a configuration file so > that a user could define their own decoding rules - but that is a lot of > work). Would it make sense to take this opportunity to require that utrace records begin with a 32-bit integer that defines what subsystem they are from, and allocate a subsystem namespace? Or something along these lines? It's easy to imagine other subsystems growing utrace support in user space, and wanting to use more than one at once. I don't really mind what the mechanism is, but if we're going to add one, now is probably the time to do it, before kdump learns too much more about utrace. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge > >> I also have patches I use at work that allow kdump to recognize a 32-bit >> malloc utrace on an amd64 machine (for when you run an i386 binary) if folks >> are interested. I'm not sure how many i386 on amd64 hacks we want in the >> official CVS tree. :) > > Personally, I'd like FreeBSD to behave similarly to Solaris: You choose > whether to compile 32-bit or 64-bit executables with a compiler switch > and everything else is transparent. FreeBSD 3.x had smarts so that nm, > ld, gdb etc could transparently handle either a.out or ELF executables. > It would be nice if FreeBSD/amd64 could do the same (though I realise > that we don't want the overheads on other platforms, which would make it > more difficult to implement). > >> I also have another set of patches to add various utrace(2) events to the >> runtime linker as well as logic in kdump to parse them that I hope to commit >> in the near future. > > Sounds good. This goes back to my first point above - I don't think it's > safe to rely on the size of a utrace record to determine its type. > > -- > Peter Jeremy >