From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756888AbdLPOwM (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Dec 2017 09:52:12 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:59118 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756394AbdLPOwI (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Dec 2017 09:52:08 -0500 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BD559218C5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=mhiramat@kernel.org Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 23:52:05 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: bhargavb , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Clarke , Ravi Bangoria , Thomas Richter , linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] perf-probe: Support escaped character in parser Message-Id: <20171216235205.173fab04c2b13abadf7497ac@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20171213154227.GC9490@kernel.org> References: <151309111236.18107.5634753157435343410.stgit@devbox> <20171212152724.GO3958@kernel.org> <20171213224024.f4d4e5dde81582f80b132be3@kernel.org> <20171213154227.GC9490@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:42:27 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:40:24PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu escreveu: > > On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 12:27:24 -0300 > > Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > > > Em Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 12:05:12AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu escreveu: > > > > Support the special characters escaped by '\' in parser. > > > > This allows user to specify versions directly like below. > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > # ./perf probe -x /lib64/libc-2.25.so malloc_get_state\\@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > > > Added new event: > > > > probe_libc:malloc_get_state (on malloc_get_state@GLIBC_2.2.5 in /usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so) > > > > > > > > You can now use it in all perf tools, such as: > > > > > > > > perf record -e probe_libc:malloc_get_state -aR sleep 1 > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > > > > > Or, you can use separators in source filename, e.g. > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > # ./perf probe -x /opt/test/a.out foo+bar.c:3 > > > > Semantic error :There is non-digit character in offset. > > > > Error: Command Parse Error. > > > > ===== > > > > > > > > Usually "+" in source file cause parser error, but > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > # ./perf probe -x /opt/test/a.out foo\\+bar.c:4 > > > > Added new event: > > > > probe_a:main (on @foo+bar.c:4 in /opt/test/a.out) > > > > > > > > You can now use it in all perf tools, such as: > > > > > > > > perf record -e probe_a:main -aR sleep 1 > > > > ===== > > > > > > > > escaped "\+" allows you to specify that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Changes in v4: > > > > - Fix a build error (Thanks for Arnaldo!) > > > > This time, I ensured that I ran "make build-test" and it passed. > > > > > > Thanks, testing it I still have that artifact: > > > > > > --------------------------------------- > > > > > > [root@jouet perf]# perf probe -x /lib64/libc-2.25.so malloc_get_state\\@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > > Added new event: > > > probe_libc:malloc_get_state (on malloc_get_state@GLIBC_2.2.5 in /usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so) > > > > > > You can now use it in all perf tools, such as: > > > > > > perf record -e probe_libc:malloc_get_state -aR sleep 1 > > > > > > [root@jouet perf]# perf probe -l > > > Failed to find debug information for address dd38eca7 > > > probe_libc:malloc_get_state (on 0xdd38eca7 in /usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so) > > > [root@jouet perf]# > > > > > > --------------------------------------- > > > > > > I mean the "on 0xdd38eca7" part: > > > > > > > > > That failed to find debug information part: > > > > > > [root@jouet perf]# perf probe -vv -l > > > Add filter: * > > > Opening /sys/kernel/debug/tracing//kprobe_events write=0 > > > Opening /sys/kernel/debug/tracing//uprobe_events write=0 > > > Parsing probe_events: p:probe_libc/malloc_get_state /usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so:0x00000000dd38eca7 > > > Group:probe_libc Event:malloc_get_state probe:p > > > try to find information at dd38eca7 in /usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so > > > Open Debuginfo file: /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so.debug > > > Failed to find debug information for address dd38eca7 > > > Failed to find corresponding probes from debuginfo. > > > symsrc__init: build id mismatch for /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so.debug. > > > Failed to find probe point from both of dwarf and map. > > > probe_libc:malloc_get_state (on 0xdd38eca7 in /usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so) > > > [root@jouet perf]# > > > > Ah, I got it. So symsrc__init checks debugfile to get symbols, > > but failed. > > > > > > > > Ok, so build-id mismatch, lets see: > > > > > > [root@jouet perf]# rpm -q glibc glibc-debuginfo > > > glibc-2.25-10.fc26.x86_64 > > > glibc-2.25-10.fc26.i686 > > > glibc-debuginfo-2.25-12.fc26.x86_64 > > > [root@jouet perf]# > > > > > > Ok, the debuginfo file is newer than the glibc installed, updating glibc > > > now... > > > > > > We could have a more informative message in this case, right? I.e. > > > something like: > > > > > > [root@jouet perf]# perf probe -l > > > There was a build-id mismatch while trying to resolve 0xdd38eca7, please > > > check your system's debuginfo files for mismatches, e.g. check the > > > versions for glibc and glibc-debuginfo. > > > probe_libc:malloc_get_state (on 0xdd38eca7 in /usr/lib64/libc-2.25.so) > > > > OK, I'll try to check how debuginfo is searched in such environment. > > So, tools/perf/util/symbol.c, function dso__load(), it will have this > loop: > > > /* > * Read the build id if possible. This is required for > * DSO_BINARY_TYPE__BUILDID_DEBUGINFO to work > */ > if (!dso->has_build_id && is_regular_file(dso->long_name)) { > __symbol__join_symfs(name, PATH_MAX, dso->long_name); > if (filename__read_build_id(name, build_id, BUILD_ID_SIZE) > 0) > dso__set_build_id(dso, build_id); > } > > /* > * Iterate over candidate debug images. > * Keep track of "interesting" ones (those which have a symtab, dynsym, > * and/or opd section) for processing. > */ > for (i = 0; i < DSO_BINARY_TYPE__SYMTAB_CNT; i++) { > > if (dso__read_binary_type_filename(dso, symtab_type, root_dir, name, PATH_MAX)) > > > ------------------- > > So the glibc file _has_ a build id, it reads it and then will try to > find a file that has that build id, that 'name' variable will have > the file being tried, which may be, for instance, at: > > [acme@jouet ~]$ perf buildid-list -i /lib64/libc-2.25.so > 7a4787e7c1263dc25461a7b2f2abd2acaa186102 > [acme@jouet ~]$ ls -la /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/7a/4787e7c1263dc25461a7b2f2abd2acaa186102 > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 33 Oct 11 09:49 /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/7a/4787e7c1263dc25461a7b2f2abd2acaa186102 -> ../../../../../lib64/libc-2.25.so > [acme@jouet ~]$ > > etc. > > So perhaps we can have a routine that does just that loop and prints the > files it finds with the debuginfo they have to help tell which files > where considered? Hmm, as far as I can see, this occured in debuginfo__new(), struct debuginfo *debuginfo__new(const char *path) { enum dso_binary_type *type; char buf[PATH_MAX], nil = '\0'; struct dso *dso; struct debuginfo *dinfo = NULL; /* Try to open distro debuginfo files */ dso = dso__new(path); if (!dso) goto out; for (type = distro_dwarf_types; !dinfo && *type != DSO_BINARY_TYPE__NOT_FOUND; type++) { if (dso__read_binary_type_filename(dso, *type, &nil, buf, PATH_MAX) < 0) continue; dinfo = __debuginfo__new(buf); } dso__put(dso); out: /* if failed to open all distro debuginfo, open given binary */ return dinfo ? : __debuginfo__new(path); } And dso__read_binary_type_filename() makes a debuginfo path from target path but doesn't check build-id. So, (I still can not reproduce your situation but) I guess, dso__read_binary_type_filename() returns some path, but __debuginfo__new() just failed to open it. Or, __debuginfo_new() opened it but since its buildid is different, it really failed to find any lines on given address. > > But perhaps the message I suggested may be good enough? Yeah, but this means we need to check the buildid of both binaries. Thank you, > > - Arnaldo -- Masami Hiramatsu