[DTrace-devel] [PATCH v3] trace: print alloca pointers as actual pointer values
Eugene Loh
eugene.loh at oracle.com
Mon Sep 15 20:41:43 UTC 2025
Largely similar comments to previous versions of this patch:
On 9/15/25 13:36, Kris Van Hees via DTrace-devel wrote:
> Because alloca pointers are stored internally as ofssets into the
The same as for v1 and v2: s/ofssets/offsets/.
> scratchmem area, they were printed as small integers. They are
> now printed as actual pointer values into kernel space.
And, again, the patch performs poorly against testing.
The new test gives me:
-OK 1 OK 333 OK 55555
+OK 1059965305 OK 1059965637 OK 1060020859
which is to say that the dereferenced values are wrong. (They are all
the correct values plus some offset.)
And with this patch, these pre-existing tests fail:
test/unittest/builtinvar/tst.tid_pid.sh: FAIL: erroneous exitcode (1).
test/unittest/funcs/alloca/tst.alloca-bcopy-top.d: FAIL: expected
results differ.
test/unittest/funcs/bcopy/tst.bcopy_arg_order.d: FAIL: expected
results differ.
test/unittest/funcs/copyinto/tst.copyinto_arg_order.d: FAIL:
expected results differ.
btw...
> diff --git a/test/unittest/actions/trace/tst.alloca.r.p b/test/unittest/actions/trace/tst.alloca.r.p
> new file mode 100755
> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
> +#!/usr/bin/gawk -f
> +
> +{
> + $1 = $1 > 0x7fffffff ? "OK" : "BAD";
> + $3 = $3 > 0x7fffffff ? "OK" : "BAD";
> + $5 = $5 > 0x7fffffff ? "OK" : "BAD";
> +}
> +
> +{
> + print;
> +}
Why are these split over two awk clauses? Can't they co-exist in the
same clause?
More information about the DTrace-devel
mailing list