similar to: usdt probes vs pid$target

I''m trying to time a function within Firefoxwith a pid$target probe [2]. e.g dtrace -Zqw -x dynvarsize=64m -x evaltime=preinit -p 13954 -s menu- construct.d -s sigcont.d elapsed: 12.7942481ms cpu : 7.7911194ms count : 40 times I''m also measuring Firefox startup time by running it arguments like this: ... file:///Users/joelr/work/mozilla/startup/startup.html#`python

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 probes. When I build the application which

X.Org has adopted GNU autoconf as its build configuration mechanism, so when I integrated the dtrace probes, I checked to see if they should be built using this test, checking for the existence of a program named "dtrace" in the path: dnl Check for dtrace program (needed to build Xserver dtrace probes) AC_ARG_WITH(dtrace, AS_HELP_STRING([--with-dtrace=PATH], [Enable dtrace

Does dtrace have a problem catching the return from memset on Mac OSX? The script below catches the entry just fine but the return clause is never entered. Thanks, Joel --- pid$target::memset:entry /arg1 == 0/ { self->size = arg2; self->ts = timestamp; self->vts = vtimestamp; } pid$target::memset:return /self->size/ { @ts = sum(timestamp - self->ts); @vts =

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

Hi, I''m posting a question hoping someone will know the answer off hand thereby reducing my search time. :-) With USDT probes, the tracepoint is only installed by libdtrace itself, never by the drti ioctl. So whenever I run a program with an USDT probe, no tracepoint is installed. Only after I run the dtrace command the tracepoint is actually installed on the victim process. My question

Suppose I have a USDT probe in Firefox and that I''m trying to catch the startup with a probe like this: proc:::exec-success /execname == "firefox-bin"/ { start = timestamp; } and stop tracing when Firefox hits this USDT probe: mozilla:::main-entry { exit(0); } How do I put the running firefox-bin into "trace mode" so that my USDT probe fires? Thanks, Joel

Hello, If I release a new kernel module, do I need to release a SDT provider with it? Just like what "mdb" does - a mdb module together with the associated kernel module. Is it a "MUST" or a "OPTION"? Also what''s the requirement of USDT and user application? Is it encouraged or not to have many probes inside the code? Can I define my own

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 have an option to control the Function name for

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), such as the containing C++

I have inserted some probes in my application, and it works great in the "debug build" I have been using. So I wanted to look at the "overhead" introduced by inactive dtrace probes in my application. I am using the Sun Studio 11 compiler, so I added the following options: -xO5 -g0 -xbuiltin But this breaks the linking of my application. Undefined first

Author: ahl Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: 72ce7e116da4db6c063a5c3c3f1bec23ce3ca69a Log message: 6395902 use of USDT probes can cause plockstat and other scripts to fail Files: update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_pid.c

Author: ahl Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: b1ab97f77b0ad2a4fe2a43d9c5aac7259840bb90 Log message: 6370454 dtrace should support USDT probes in static functions Files: update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_dof.c update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_link.c update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_provider.c update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_provider.h

[Perhaps someone could rename this list to dtrace-matt-problems-discuss?] If I run this script against 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

while trying to use the USDT made available to us in Postgresql database I have problems enabling them. On my database server I ran 1024+ PG processes (1024 clients). The server is a 8 core T2000 @1000MHz. 32GB. 7 storage arrays. Solaris 10 Update 4. Home compiled PG 8.3 beta 1 (optimized binary for T1 chip) with DTrace probes enabled. When running without enabling the probes I have approx 25%

Is there a limit on the number of user space probes that can be present at any time? I have compiled very many probes into our product, and can''t see all of them in "dtrace -l". it looks very much like I have all of them up to some point at which I''ve hit some hard limit. I can see a total of 8588 probes, I think 2 processes have all of the ones I expect (one has 1752

Does anyone has any ideas about this problem? 2008/1/15, ?? TaoJie <eulertao at gmail.com>: > > Hi all: > > I''m working on revealing system performance now. > My testing program is an infinite loop. Inside the loop, it will do some > mathematical opertaions and call function callee(), then go to the next > loop. > I install a alarm(30) in the program. It

Hello, I am trying to get documentation how how this lazyloading happens when you are dealing with dtrace probes being added to user applications. In particular if it somehow avoids the overhead of registering dtrace probes when they aren''t needed, how does it know if they are needed, etc... thanks, Robert

Hi Evan, Evan Cheng wrote: > This does not patch cleanly for me (PPCISelLowering.cpp). Can you > prepare a updated patch? This should work, though I won't have access to my test box now until next Thursday so no guarantees :) Cheers, Gary -- http://gbenson.net/ -------------- next part -------------- Index: lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.h

Ah, didn't see that, that's what comes of trying to do something at 5pm :) I attached an updated patch which creates a virtual register instead of using R0. How does this look? Cheers, Gary Dan Gohman wrote: > PPCTargetLowering::EmitInstrWithCustomInserter has a reference > to the current MachineFunction for other purposes. Can you use > MachineFunction::getRegInfo instead?