From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC785C43331 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:59:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 880A420714 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:59:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726215AbgC0K7N (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:59:13 -0400 Received: from mail.ut.ac.ir ([80.66.177.10]:59338 "EHLO mail.ut.ac.ir" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726165AbgC0K7N (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:59:13 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ut.ac.ir (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CCF71DB22A; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:29:09 +0430 (+0430) Received: from mail.ut.ac.ir ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ut.ac.ir [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Ng1tdRUs2De5; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:29:07 +0430 (+0430) Received: from mail.ut.ac.ir (mail.ut.ac.ir [194.225.0.10]) by mail.ut.ac.ir (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1A651DB228; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:29:06 +0430 (+0430) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:29:06 +0430 From: ahmadkhorrami To: Jiri Olsa Cc: Steven Rostedt , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Linux-trace Users , Peter Zijlstra , linux-trace-users-owner@vger.kernel.org, Jin Yao , Milian Wolff , Namhyung Kim , Changbin Du , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Wrong Perf Backtraces In-Reply-To: <20200327092045.GH1947699@krava> References: <20200325210252.GC1947699@krava> <20200325170932.34d52269@gandalf.local.home> <20200325214624.GD1947699@krava> <52904543671bcb68ea9109b90c3e4267@ut.ac.ir> <20200326095928.GF1947699@krava> <243486883401862967ec2b06348c67f3@ut.ac.ir> <20200326153950.GG1947699@krava> <20200327092045.GH1947699@krava> Message-ID: <821540886fc57d7749edee585a50602f@ut.ac.ir> X-Sender: ahmadkhorrami@ut.ac.ir User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.6 Sender: linux-trace-users-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-users@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: 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 . > 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