From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, sumanthk@linux.ibm.com,
svens@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf/test: Fix perf test 89 on x86
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 11:34:58 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y5nfEu+3sU/Hcoon@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f5e69102-ed17-1f2d-3a09-3c7968b611ff@linux.ibm.com>
Em Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:40:32AM +0100, Thomas Richter escreveu:
> On 12/13/22 15:46, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 11:57:29AM +0100, Thomas Richter escreveu:
> >> perf test '89: probe libc's inet_pton & backtrace it with ping'
> >> fails on x86. Debugging revealed a changed stack trace for the
> >> ping command using probes:
> >> ping 35729 [002] 8006.365063: probe_libc:inet_pton: (3ff9603e7c0)
> >> 12be50 __GI___inet_pton+0x0 (/usr/lib64/libc.so.6)
> >> 4fca main+0x139b (/usr/bin/ping)
> >> The line getaddrinfo.... in the call stack is gone.
> >> It was introduced with glibc version 2.36.8 released
> >> with Fedora 37.
> >> Output before on x86
> >> # ./perf test 89
> >> 89: probe libc's inet_pton & backtrace it with ping : FAILED!
> >> #
> >> Output after on x86:
> >> # ./perf test 89
> >> 89: probe libc's inet_pton & backtrace it with ping : Ok
> >> #
> > Not having at the current state of that script, that $expected may be a
> > subset of the actual backtrace, i.e. will this continue working with
> > the systems where that getaddrinfo line appear?
> No, that is not the case.
> Taking this into account requires a larger rework of the call stack
> checking. Not just simple line by line matching which is done now.
> It also raises the question of how far to go back
> in glibc history. Different versions of glibc have different call stacks.
> I will rethink this...
One possibility is to have the options on a temp file, the previous one,
then if it fails, remove the getaddrinfo line and try again, if it
works, its the new glibc, test result is Ok.
Add a commment stating that from circa glibc versiuon 2.36.8 the
getaddrinfo isn't there anymore.
- Arnaldo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-14 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-13 10:57 [PATCH 1/2] perf/test: Fix perf test 84 on s390 Thomas Richter
2022-12-13 10:57 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf/test: Fix perf test 89 on x86 Thomas Richter
2022-12-13 14:46 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2022-12-14 10:40 ` Thomas Richter
2022-12-14 14:34 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-12-13 10:37 [PATCH 1/2] perf/test: Fix perf test 84 on s390 Thomas Richter
2022-12-13 10:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf/test: Fix perf test 89 on x86 Thomas Richter
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=Y5nfEu+3sU/Hcoon@kernel.org \
--to=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sumanthk@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tmricht@linux.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).