[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: kern/43611: kernel-trace (via ktruss) reports wrong parameter/result values
The following reply was made to PR kern/43611; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: christos%zoulas.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost, kern-bug-people%netbsd.org@localhost,
Subject: Re: kern/43611: kernel-trace (via ktruss) reports wrong
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:57:18 -0400
On Jul 15, 8:15pm, dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost (David Holland) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: kern/43611: kernel-trace (via ktruss) reports wrong parameter
| Mm, point. Maybe we ought to invent a new kind of tracing for this
| purpose (since supervised execution was trendy in research for a while
| and it's getting to the point of moving to production...)
| I'm not sure if it makes sense for that to be different from a
| debugger interface or not.
We already support PT_SYSCALL, although it might be broken in current.
| > | (I'm not particularly clear on exactly what ktruss does that's
| > | different from running kdump afterwards, but then I've never been
| > | particularly clear on why ktruss is desirable relative to running
| > | kdump afterwards, either.)
| > Interactivity; you can watch processes that stop and wait for events
| > and see what they do as you supply the different events.
| Ah. Yeah, I guess that can be useful. The main problem I've always had
| with strace and truss and whatnot is that the trace output gets mixed
| with the program's output; when I first found ktrace years ago it was
| a big step forward.
For that you can use -o fname and tail -f fname in another pty.
Main Index |
Thread Index |