This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: [PATCH v2.5][DRAFT] Add test for target_set tapset.
- From: Przemysław Pawełczyk <przemyslaw at pawelczyk dot it>
- To: Josh Stone <jistone at redhat dot com>
- Cc: systemtap at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:51:06 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2.5][DRAFT] Add test for target_set tapset.
- References: <1540131125.403201245477347883.JavaMail.root@zmail01.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> <1962041611.403221245477441570.JavaMail.root@zmail01.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com>
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 07:57, Josh Stone<jistone@redhat.com> wrote:
> ----- "Przemyslaw Pawelczyk" <przemyslaw@pawelczyk.it> wrote:
>> +probe nd_syscall.nanosleep
>> +{
>> + ? ? if (target_set_pid(pid()) && @cast(req_uaddr, "timespec",
>> "kernel<linux/time.h>")->tv_sec == $1)
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? target_set_report()
>> +}
>> +
>> +%( arch == "x86_64" || arch == "ppc64" || arch == "ia64" %?
>> +probe nd_syscall.compat_nanosleep
>> +{
>> + ? ? if (target_set_pid(pid()) && @cast(req_uaddr, "compat_timespec",
>> "kernel<linux/compat.h>")->tv_sec == $1)
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? target_set_report()
>> +}
>> +%)
>
> I just realized that this gets a LOT easier with the syscall tapset instead:
>
> probe syscall.nanosleep, syscall.compat_nanosleep ?
> {
> ? ? ? ?if (target_set_pid(pid()) && $rqtp->tv_sec == $1)
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?target_set_report()
> }
Indeed. New patch is already sent.
> We generally assume that debuginfo is installed for running the testsuite, so let's not focus anymore on problems that aren't related to the thing we're trying to test...
Right. Thanks!
> Josh
Regards.
--
Przemysław Pawełczyk