search for: probes

NAME ID a b c d 1 Control_1 probe~B01R01C01 381 213 345 653 2 Control_2 probe~B01R01C02 574 629 563 783 3 Control_1 probe~B01R09C01 673 511 521 967 4 Control_3 probe~B01R09C02 53 809 999 50 5 MM0289~RFU:11810.15 probe~B29R13C06 681 34 115 587 6 MM0289~RFU:9238.41 probe~B29R13C05 784 443 20 784 7 MM16597~RFU:36765.38 probe~B44R15C20 719 251 790 445 8 MM16597~RFU:41258.94 probe~B44R15C19 677

How do I query an application to see if it supports any USDT probe points?

Hi people, When working with some usdt C++ probes we have come across a few issues. Controlling USDT Function name: Putting in usdt probes into C++ code gives you the mangled enclosing function name for the probes Function name. Working around this can be a pain. You need to wrap your usdt probes in extern C functions and call these. Could we...

Hi, experts for example, the below case: You can see a lot of back and forth MTU probe packets been exchanged between tinc nodes, but it’s weird that, from the debug log, one line shows "No response to MTU probes from node1”, but it indeed received a lot of MTU probe response, and finally it get the conclusion of "Packet for node1 (1.1.1.1 port 443) larger than minimum MTU”. 2017-06-21 08:12:05 tinc.myvpn[18854]: Got MTU probe length 1341 from node1 (1.1.1.1 port 443) 2017-06-21 08:12:05 tinc.myvpn[18...

...and then ... "A probe that has a module and function as part of its name is known as an anchored probe, and one that does not is known as unanchored." Here''s my question: By the above definition, "pid" and "fbt" or clearly anchored providers since their probes specify specific locations in a program. However, other providers, like "vminfo" or "proc", while they obviously fire at a specific location, are not really defined by that location, but rather by when a certain kind of event occurs. And then there''s "sysproc...

Hi, I get the following error when running libvirtd on MacOS as root: $ sudo libvirtd 2019-07-11 00:12:33.379+0000: 123145573953536: info : libvirt version: 5.5.0 2019-07-11 00:12:33.379+0000: 123145573953536: warning : virProcessGetStartTime:1070 : Process start time of pid 49746 not available on this platform 2019-07-11 00:12:33.379+0000: 123145573953536: error : virSysinfoReadDMI:1172 :

Hi, I am adding DTrace probes within NFS v3 client. In my current implementation, I use some tsd_*() functions and kmem_zalloc() function. These functions might be heavy and affect the performance. I want to call this function only when DTrace is running or the DTrace probes are enable. So is there a way to check DTrace...

...to probe any of the Python interpreter''s C functions on OS X. $ sudo dtrace -n ''pid$target::PyEval_EvalFrameEx:entry'' -c python dtrace: invalid probe specifier pid$target::PyEval_EvalFrameEx:entry: probe description pid59706::PyEval_EvalFrameEx:entry does not match any probes These functions show up in ustack()s, but they do not appear to be available for probing. There do not appear to be any probes in the "a.out" module: $ sudo dtrace -n ''pid$target:a.out::entry'' -c python dtrace: invalid probe specifier pid$target:a.out::entry: probe d...

I added a couple of static probes to Firefox to measure actual work done. I could have used a pid$target probe with a function name but work is done within an if statement, which is where I placed the static probes. I''m wondering about my use, though. Is the following significantly more efficient than pid$target::...

Hi All, I''ve got a problem when I have USDT probes in a static library and in the application code outside of the library. I build the static library containing some USDT probes, glomming everything together (ld -r) before creating the .a file to preserve the probe symbols. This all works fine. I build an application which also has some USDT pr...

...nst my binary (which contains a USDT probe called ''concurrentq-latency''): ::: / probename == "concurrentq-latency" / { printf("[%s]:[%s]:[%s]\n", probeprov, probefunc, probename); } I get this output: dtrace: script ''testq.d'' matched 46056 probes dtrace: pid 26257 has exited CPU ID FUNCTION:NAME 2 46076 dequeue_thread:concurrentq-latency [tests26257]:[dequeue_thread]:[concurrentq-latency] However, if I try to specify the probe in the ''normal'' fashion: :::concurrentq-latency { printf("[%s]:...

...2 AM, Bright Zhao <startryst at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, experts > > for example, the below case: > > You can see a lot of back and forth MTU probe packets been exchanged between tinc nodes, but it’s weird that, from the debug log, one line shows "No response to MTU probes from node1”, but it indeed received a lot of MTU probe response, and finally it get the conclusion of "Packet for node1 (1.1.1.1 port 443) larger than minimum MTU”. > > 2017-06-21 08:12:05 tinc.myvpn[18854]: Got MTU probe length 1341 from node1 (1.1.1.1 port 443) > 2017-06-21 08:12:0...

...bit process on snv_110. For example, the pid is 10603, I will have following output for dtrace command: #dtrace -n pid10603:libc.so.1:memcpy:return dtrace: invalid probe specifier pid10603:libc.so.1:memcpy:return: probe description pid10603:libc.so.1:memcpy:return does not match any probes This just happens for 64bit process, 32bit process has no such a issue. Following is dtrace output for 32bit-process # dtrace -n pid403:libc.so.1:memcpy:return dtrace: description ''pid403:libc.so.1:memcpy:return'' matched 1 probe ^C Disable shows th...

...r2 14404467 14404502 0 -0.35 chr2 14421718 14421777 -0.43 -0.35 chr2 16031710 16031769 -0.43 -0.35 chr2 16036178 16036237 -0.43 -0.35 chr2 16048665 16048724 -0.43 -0.35 chr2 37491676 37491735 0 0 chr2 37702947 37703009 0 0 This is the output that I am expecting: Sample Chr Start End Values Probes sample1 chr2 9896633 14404502 0 4 sample1 chr2 14421718 16048724 -0.43 4 sample1 chr2 37491676 37703001 0 2 sample2 chr2 9896633 9896690 0 2 sample2 chr2 14314039 16048724 -0.35 6 sample2 chr2 37491676 37703009 0 2 Here the Chr value is same but can be any other value aswell so unique amon...

Hi, As I''ve discussed before whenever we add USDT probes to a C++ function and call dtrace -l we get the mangled C++ name for the dtrace function, being listed :( Now the point of USDT probes is to abstract a higher level semantic construct for users to make use of. Surely it is not meant to be listing Unstable Interfaces (implementation details),...

I want to list/use the nfs probes but I get the error "dtrace: failed to match nfs*:::: No probe matches description". Is there a way to enable nfs provider probes? My system is running snv_112 (bfu''ed from the gate archive) # dtrace -lP nfs* ID PROVIDER MODULE FUNCTIO...

On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 05:36:12PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > It's next to impossible for us to do connector probing on topologies > without occasionally racing with userspace, since creating a connector > itself causes a hotplug event which we have to send before probing the > available PBN of a connector. Even if we didn't have this hotplug event > sent, there's still

...commit log, the line added for keep saft to compress. for capable with current version, I can't remove this line, so I add 43 back then we got reply. and once MTU fix, apply the saft margine when set mtu "n->mtu = n->minmtu - MTU / 64 - 20;" now, I can fix MTU within about 10 probes. 2020-02-13 23:20:05 tinc.firma[28376]: Fixing MTU of office01 (123.120.166.214 port 655) to 1408 after 6 probes 2020-02-13 23:20:08 tinc.firma[28376]: Fixing MTU of vmub1804 (111.196.162.156 port 59172) to 1405 after 7 probes 2020-02-13 23:20:08 tinc.firma[28376]: Fixing MTU of home02 (111.196.16...

Apologetic prologue: I've looked through the mailing list for an answer to this (since I'm sure it's trivial) but I have not been able to find a fix. So the problem is that I want each group to have a different type of plot. "Probes" should be points and "Segments" should be lines (preferably using the segment plot command, but I've just been trying -- unsuccessfully -- to get lines to work). To be exact, the data looks like: loc val valtype mouse 1428 0.1812367 Probes 2 1439 -0.4534155...

On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 01:13:36PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > On Thu, 2020-03-05 at 15:11 +0200, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 05:36:12PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > > It's next to impossible for us to do connector probing on topologies > > > without occasionally racing with userspace, since creating a connector > > > itself causes a