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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 9C3F4C43381 for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 19:38:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.lttng.org (lists.lttng.org [167.114.26.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC0CC60238 for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 19:38:50 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BC0CC60238 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lists.lttng.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lttng-dev-bounces@lists.lttng.org Received: from lists-lttng01.efficios.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.lttng.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DZGY45Mhcz19Qt; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:48 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=lists.lttng.org; s=default; t=1612813129; bh=jMwiev0uG5EowEbHIuXF+vdYT01zuKY7FW1Bqbrfc9E=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=QA81bZjkePZ8+gbCtDSctOZT9ZDFyg1+6xm94o1p/VQ68Njizi6opC8rh7Skopdsb oY1Q3CBqKHrFnDiuT+bzovwQ+J536BML49U3jOiZR/3dNcaJTNNeSNzLPvDTRwOrwf JoP/WKzPjKsazN0puu7MMmnhKIZO1X/lsuqIDINvWNuo5f4GKU9mDuDTPHnpuk63bS N8/SUVPa0U2HvHm4U5AijkUBH9NDEJ+TNKVU2QMlwsNWor+ey3h+NtS0BiYJiMpsvs XWAMA40LqXCHmuEJgPlBfmZfyZXoNLRguPzuJn0CwD4G6BdBP4sx17ilzHabv0kcng x4BIRKqAb1XOQ== Received: from mail.efficios.com (mail.efficios.com [167.114.26.124]) by lists.lttng.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DZGY31nCPz19Qr for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADBA2D864C for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.efficios.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail03.efficios.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id TS00JE35_rDa; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716BC2D8BC1; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:46 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail.efficios.com 716BC2D8BC1 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at efficios.com Received: from mail.efficios.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail03.efficios.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id b0oMdpj7MPuG; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail03.efficios.com (mail03.efficios.com [167.114.26.124]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C2B2D8CC1; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:38:46 -0500 (EST) To: Mohammad Kavousi Cc: lttng-dev , Yan Chen , Xutong Chen Message-ID: <108657053.9981.1612813126291.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [167.114.26.124] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.15_GA_3996 (ZimbraWebClient - FF85 (Linux)/8.8.15_GA_3996) Thread-Topic: LTTng Support for Network Namespace Thread-Index: m0FwcdkepQ52k4U0RyyCZdAeW1f6xQ== Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] LTTng Support for Network Namespace X-BeenThere: lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.31 Precedence: list List-Id: LTTng development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev Reply-To: Mathieu Desnoyers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: lttng-dev-bounces@lists.lttng.org Sender: "lttng-dev" ----- On Feb 8, 2021, at 1:04 PM, lttng-dev lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org wrote: > Dear LTTng developers, > I was wondering if LTTng currently (or in the future) supports network > namespaces. For instance, an ambiguity in the logs would make problems for > future system analysis. Did you try the "net_ns" context ? > Taking the "bind" system call, that would help us distinguish between different > local IP addresses when two or more container instances are running on the > host, given that the "umyaddr" field is an address inside the memory, how would > we recover the local addresses after the trace has been collected? > syscall_entry_bind: { cpu_id = 1 }, { mnt_ns = 4026532553, pid = 532, tid = 532, > vtid = 532, vpid = 532 }, { fd = 14, umyaddr = 93827759199256, addrlen = 12 } In lttng-modules, we'd need to implement a system call override for the bind system call which fetches the umyaddr content from user-space. You can see the x86-64 override code for the "connect" system call which fetches the uservaddr from user-space as an inspiration. Thanks, Mathieu > Thanks, we appreciate the help beforehand! > Mohammad > _______________________________________________ > lttng-dev mailing list > lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org > https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev