Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 23:52:20 -0800 From: Jos Backus <josb@cncdsl.com> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@ebuilt.com> Subject: Re: Solaris /usr/proc/bin/pstack functionality? Message-ID: <20020103075242.GC14656@lizzy.bugworks.com> In-Reply-To: <200201030734.g037YxI62790@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20020103072813.GB14656@lizzy.bugworks.com> <200201030734.g037YxI62790@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 11:34:59PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Well, ktrace -i will certainly follow children. In fact, ktrace can
> attach to all current children (-d) of a process as well as attach to
> new children. Yahoo found a few bugs in ktrace by running
> 'ktrace -i -d -p 1'. Think about what that does :-)
>
> If ktrace can do it, I'm sure truss could be made to do it.
Here's what pstack does:
pstack Print a hex+symbolic stack trace for each lwp in
each process.
Solaris truss(1) has this:
-l Includes the id of the responsible lightweight
process (LWP) with each line of trace output. If
-f is also specified, both the process-id and the
LWP-id are included.
Justin says:
Yup, we're all scratching our heads right now at some weirdness
going on with select()/poll(), but all we can see is the kernel
primitives. *sigh* Our job would be a lot easier if we had
pstack. =)
So the question is, does ktrace in fact have this functionality? He's talking
about LWPs, which I am assuming (please correct me if I am wrong) equates to
libc_r on FreeBSD.
Fwiw, I'm asking as an interested 3rd party. Thanks!
> -Matt
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ Santa Clara, CA
_/ _/ _/
_/ _/_/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/
josb@cncdsl.com _/_/ _/_/_/ use Std::Disclaimer;
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020103075242.GC14656>