Re: Wrong Perf Backtraces

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


I revised the code. Hopefully, it works. Could you check it with your own outputs? It is valuable for me to know if your output contains wrong backtraces or not. Here is the link:

On 2020-03-27 15:34, ahmadkhorrami wrote:

I do the following:
If this line is in the perf script backtrace:
7f21ffe256db g_main_context_iteration+0x2b (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/
I run the following command:
gdb -batch -ex 'file /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/' -ex 'disass g_main_context_iteration'.


On 2020-03-27 15:29, ahmadkhorrami wrote:

Thanks! Could you tell me what should be changed in order to make the code runnable on your system, if it is possible?

On 2020-03-27 13:50, Jiri Olsa wrote:

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 10:49:12PM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote:

Here is the link for the python script:
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/ 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/

I assume it's because I have all the dso binaries stored
under .biuldid path, while you check the output name


On 2020-03-26 20:09, Jiri Olsa wrote:

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 05:50:27PM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote:

First of all, many thanks for your time. Did you say that the first
file has

The first file ( has repeated gmallocn()s
the second ( also has problems with
(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 <caller, callees>.
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
It takes the perf script output file as input. I will upload the
script in
an hour.


[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux