From: Kris Van Hees <kris.van.hees@oracle.com>
To: Eugene Loh <eugene.loh@oracle.com>
Cc: Kris Van Hees <kris.van.hees@oracle.com>,
dtrace@lists.linux.dev, dtrace-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: Re: [DTrace-devel] [PATCH v3] trace: print alloca pointers as actual pointer values
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 21:44:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aMjA7o55OLI9cATN@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <487cd783-80c1-e037-0c28-c2ff94364a9d@oracle.com>
On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 04:41:43PM -0400, Eugene Loh wrote:
> Largely similar comments to previous versions of this patch:
>
> On 9/15/25 13:36, Kris Van Hees via DTrace-devel wrote:
> > Because alloca pointers are stored internally as ofssets into the
>
> The same as for v1 and v2: s/ofssets/offsets/.
Ok, yes, sorry - been spending time on functionality over typos.
> > scratchmem area, they were printed as small integers. They are
> > now printed as actual pointer values into kernel space.
>
> And, again, the patch performs poorly against testing.
>
> The new test gives me:
> -OK 1 OK 333 OK 55555
> +OK 1059965305 OK 1059965637 OK 1060020859
> which is to say that the dereferenced values are wrong. (They are all the
> correct values plus some offset.)
>
> And with this patch, these pre-existing tests fail:
> test/unittest/builtinvar/tst.tid_pid.sh: FAIL: erroneous exitcode (1).
> test/unittest/funcs/alloca/tst.alloca-bcopy-top.d: FAIL: expected
> results differ.
> test/unittest/funcs/bcopy/tst.bcopy_arg_order.d: FAIL: expected results
> differ.
> test/unittest/funcs/copyinto/tst.copyinto_arg_order.d: FAIL: expected
> results differ.
Hm, this is getting frustrating. Tracking down why I was not seeing those
failures on my end.
> btw...
>
> > diff --git a/test/unittest/actions/trace/tst.alloca.r.p b/test/unittest/actions/trace/tst.alloca.r.p
> > new file mode 100755
> > @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
> > +#!/usr/bin/gawk -f
> > +
> > +{
> > + $1 = $1 > 0x7fffffff ? "OK" : "BAD";
> > + $3 = $3 > 0x7fffffff ? "OK" : "BAD";
> > + $5 = $5 > 0x7fffffff ? "OK" : "BAD";
> > +}
> > +
> > +{
> > + print;
> > +}
>
> Why are these split over two awk clauses? Can't they co-exist in the same
> clause?
Yes they can. But they don't have to.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-16 1:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-15 17:36 [PATCH v3] trace: print alloca pointers as actual pointer values Kris Van Hees
2025-09-15 20:41 ` [DTrace-devel] " Eugene Loh
2025-09-16 1:44 ` Kris Van Hees [this message]
2025-09-16 3:20 ` Kris Van Hees
2025-09-16 13:17 ` Kris Van Hees
2025-09-16 16:02 ` Kris Van Hees
2025-09-16 17:07 ` Eugene Loh
2025-09-16 18:00 ` Kris Van Hees
2025-09-16 18:56 ` Eugene Loh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aMjA7o55OLI9cATN@oracle.com \
--to=kris.van.hees@oracle.com \
--cc=dtrace-devel@oss.oracle.com \
--cc=dtrace@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=eugene.loh@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.