Re: (unknown)

[fche at redhat dot com (Frank Ch. Eigler)]

"Philipp Michael" <Philipp.Michael@gmx.net> writes:

> [...] my little test program (below) shows only: bash (xxxx).... so
> is there a possibility to get the direct command names like the
> appear in the process list (ps -ef) ? can i go into the bash process
> list?

I believe you're seeing semi-intended effects by the tapset/process.stp
code.  I believe it will get deprecated soon, as utrace-based process.*
probes are coming on line.

> probe process.create { printf ("%s(%d) create done (%s)\n", execname(), pid(), argstr) }
> probe process.exec { printf ("%s(%d) exec done (%s)\n", execname(), pid(), argstr) }

Both those probes fire in the context of the thread that performs the fork/exec.
Try this one:

probe process.begin { printf ("%d created %s(%d)\n", ppid(), execname(), pid()) }

Now, execname() normally lacks the full path name, even though we do get
hold of it at the utrace level.  Perhaps the utrace process.begin probe
should supply that value to the script with a $-variable.

- FChE