----- On Mar 21, 2018, at 8:01 PM, Shehab Elsayed <shehaby...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just to clarify more what I meant by custom events; I have new tracepoints > added > in the source code of the benchmark. However, I don't enable the corresponding > events when I do the actual tracing. > This is the sequence followed in building the benchmark: > gcc-7.2 -c -O2 -pthread -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500 -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=200112 -std=c11 > -g > -fno-strict-aliasing -DLTTNG_INST lu.c > gcc-7.2 -O2 -pthread -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500 -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=200112 -std=c11 -g > -fno-strict-aliasing -DLTTNG_INST -o LU_NCB lu.o > ../../instrumentation/lttng_tp/tp.o -lm -llttng-ust -ldl > LTTNG_INST is just a preprocessor flag I have and tp.o is my custom > tracepoints Could you share a repository with your custom instrumentation on github, so I could try it out ? My current problem is that I cannot reproduce your issue on my end. Thanks, Mathieu > Shehab Y. Elsayed, MSc. > PhD Student > The Edwards S. Rogers Sr. Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering > University of Toronto > E-mail: [ https://webmail.rice.edu/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX&index=11# | > shehaby...@gmail.com ] > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Shehab Elsayed < [ > mailto:shehaby...@gmail.com > | shehaby...@gmail.com ] > wrote: >> Still running into same problem. I attached the debug trace I got after >> applying >> the 2 patches. >> The benchmark I am running also includes some custom created tracepoints. I >> am >> not adding the events being traced in the files I have provided. Do you think >> this might be causing a problem when I have tracpoints from 2 different >> packages? >> Shehab Y. Elsayed, MSc. >> PhD Student >> The Edwards S. Rogers Sr. Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering >> University of Toronto >> E-mail: [ https://webmail.rice.edu/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX&index=11# | >> shehaby...@gmail.com ] >> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 4:22 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >> wrote: >>> ----- On Mar 21, 2018, at 1:55 PM, Shehab Elsayed < [ >>> mailto:shehaby...@gmail.com | shehaby...@gmail.com ] > wrote: >>>> I am so sorry for the late replies. >>>> I have tried the first patch you sent and the problem still happens >>>> (although >>>> seemingly less frequently especially with debugging enabled!!!!). I have >>>> attached the output I got from one of the erroneous runs. >>>> I will try the updated patch and let you know how it goes. >>>> Also, I am not sure if these points make any difference: >>>> 1- The error actually happens at the end of the application. It actually >>>> finishes execution, but then something goes wrong. >>>> 2- I run into this problem only for some of the benchmarks (or at least the >>>> problems happens much less frequently for others that I didn't run into >>>> it, not >>>> yet) >>>> Thanks you very much, and sorry again for the late replies. >>> No worries! Looking through your log, I notice that pthread set cancel >>> state has >>> problems when >>> called from application threads. We do not restore the original thread's >>> cancel >>> state. Can you try >>> with the attached patch applied on top of the previous one ? >>> Thanks, >>> Mathieu >>>> Shehab Y. Elsayed, MSc. >>>> PhD Student >>>> The Edwards S. Rogers Sr. Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering >>>> University of Toronto >>>> E-mail: [ https://webmail.rice.edu/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX&index=11# >>>> | >>>> shehaby...@gmail.com ] >>>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >>>> wrote: >>>>> ----- On Mar 20, 2018, at 5:42 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> ----- On Mar 20, 2018, at 4:58 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> ----- On Mar 20, 2018, at 12:07 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com >>>>>>> ] > >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> ----- On Mar 19, 2018, at 4:21 PM, Shehab Elsayed < [ >>>>>>>> mailto:shehaby...@gmail.com | shehaby...@gmail.com ] > wrote: >>>>>>>>> I did "echo "-1" > /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid " and made >>>>>>>>> sure the >>>>>>>>> value was actually written by "cat >>>>>>>>> /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid" >>>>>>>>> It executed normally 2 times but then got the same error. >>>>>>>> Can you provide the output when reproducing the issue with the >>>>>>>> LTTNG_UST_DEBUG=1 environment variable set when starting >>>>>>>> your test program ? >>>>>>> I just noticed something that might explain what goes wrong here: >>>>>>> lttng-context-perf-counters.c: add_thread_field() grabs the ust_lock(). >>>>>>> Pthread >>>>>>> mutex >>>>>>> in your case is instrumented with the pthread wrapper. This >>>>>>> "add_thread_field" >>>>>>> is invoked >>>>>>> the first time the perf counter is hit by each given thread. When this >>>>>>> happens, >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> instrumented pthread mutex will try to call into the instrumentation >>>>>>> tracepoint >>>>>>> again, >>>>>>> which will call add_thread_field() (again), and so on until we reach the >>>>>>> libringbuffer >>>>>>> "lib_ring_buffer_nesting" threshold of 4 calls deep. >>>>>>> I suspect this situation where we recursively call add_thread_field is >>>>>>> unexpected, >>>>>>> which may trigger your double-free here. >>>>>>> Will investigate more. >>>>>> Can you try with the attached patch applied ? >>>>> Here is an updated v2 of the patch which tests the notrace tls counter >>>>> sooner >>>>> (before evaluating >>>>> filter). Please let me know how it goes. >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Mathieu >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>>>> Shehab Y. Elsayed, MSc. >>>>>>>>> PhD Student >>>>>>>>> The Edwards S. Rogers Sr. Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering >>>>>>>>> University of Toronto >>>>>>>>> E-mail: [ >>>>>>>>> https://webmail.rice.edu/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX&index=11# | >>>>>>>>> shehaby...@gmail.com ] >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 4:01 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>>>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | >>>>>>>>> mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> ----- On Mar 19, 2018, at 3:53 PM, Shehab Elsayed < [ >>>>>>>>>> mailto:shehaby...@gmail.com | shehaby...@gmail.com ] > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> cat /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid ---> returns 1 >>>>>>>>>>> I run the program as a normal user >>>>>>>>>>> The glibc version I get by running "ldd --version" is 2.17 >>>>>>>>>> Can you reproduce the issue after you do this as root ? >>>>>>>>>> echo "-1" > /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid >>>>>>>>>> Based on this documentation of the Linux kernel: >>>>>>>>>> Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt: >>>>>>>>>> perf_event_paranoid: >>>>>>>>>> Controls use of the performance events system by unprivileged >>>>>>>>>> users (without CAP_SYS_ADMIN). The default value is 2. >>>>>>>>>> -1: Allow use of (almost) all events by all users >>>>>>>>>> Ignore mlock limit after perf_event_mlock_kb without CAP_IPC_LOCK >>>>>>>>>> >=0: Disallow ftrace function tracepoint by users without >>>>>>>>>> >CAP_SYS_ADMIN >>>>>>>>>> Disallow raw tracepoint access by users without CAP_SYS_ADMIN >>>>>>>>>> >=1: Disallow CPU event access by users without CAP_SYS_ADMIN >>>>>>>>>> >=2: Disallow kernel profiling by users without CAP_SYS_ADMIN >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>>>>>> Shehab Y. Elsayed, MSc. >>>>>>>>>>> PhD Student >>>>>>>>>>> The Edwards S. Rogers Sr. Dept. of Electrical and Computer >>>>>>>>>>> Engineering >>>>>>>>>>> University of Toronto >>>>>>>>>>> E-mail: [ >>>>>>>>>>> https://webmail.rice.edu/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX&index=11# | >>>>>>>>>>> shehaby...@gmail.com ] >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>>>>>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | >>>>>>>>>>> mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> ---- On Mar 19, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | >>>>>>>>>>>> mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- On Mar 19, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Shehab Elsayed < [ >>>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:shehaby...@gmail.com | shehaby...@gmail.com ] > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I tried with only one of those contexts and I still ran >>>>>>>>>>>>>> into the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem. >>>>>>>>>>>>> What is the setting returned by >>>>>>>>>>>>> cat /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid >>>>>>>>>>>>> on your system ? And do you run your test program as root or >>>>>>>>>>>>> normal user ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please CC the mailing list on your reply. >>>>>>>>>>>> I will also need to know what glibc version you have on your >>>>>>>>>>>> system. >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shehab Y. Elsayed, MSc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PhD Student >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Edwards S. Rogers Sr. Dept. of Electrical and Computer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering >>>>>>>>>>>>>> University of Toronto >>>>>>>>>>>>>> E-mail: [ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://webmail.rice.edu/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX&index=11# >>>>>>>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>>>>>>> shehaby...@gmail.com ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- On Mar 19, 2018, at 12:36 PM, Shehab Elsayed < [ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:shehaby...@gmail.com | shehaby...@gmail.com ] > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mathieu, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much for your reply. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I manually built lttng-ust from source (commit #: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 8a208943e21700211beee3ea64180a5a534c7d2a). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is how I set up the tracing session: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1- lttng create lu_ncb_8_native -o {path} >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2- lttng enable-event --userspace >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng_ust_pthread:pthread_mutex_lock_req >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng enable-event --userspace >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng_ust_pthread:pthread_mutex_lock_acq >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng enable-event --userspace >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng_ust_pthread:pthread_mutex_lock_trylock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng enable-event --userspace >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng_ust_pthread:pthread_mutex_lock_unlock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3- lttng add-context -u -t procname >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t vpid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t pthread_id >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t vtid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t ip >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t perf:thread:cpu-cycles >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t perf:thread:cycles >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t perf:thread:instructions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4- lttng start >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5- LD_PRELOAD=/usr/local/lib/liblttng-ust-pthread-wrapper.so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ./lu_ncb -p8 -n8096 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -b32 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6- lttng stop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7- lttng destroy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you reproduce if you remove the following contexts ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t perf:thread:cpu-cycles >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t perf:thread:cycles >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng add-context -u -t perf:thread:instructions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And if you only keep a single of those contexts ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shehab Y. Elsayed, MSc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PhD Student >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Edwards S. Rogers Sr. Dept. of Electrical and Computer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> University of Toronto >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> E-mail: [ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://webmail.rice.edu/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX&index=11# >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shehaby...@gmail.com ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers < [ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com | >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com ] > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- On Mar 16, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Shehab Elsayed < [ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailto:shehaby...@gmail.com | shehaby...@gmail.com ] > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am trying to instrument a pthread application using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provided pthread >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrapper, but I sometimes run into a "Double free or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corruption error ( fasttop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> )" error. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please provide more information about the version of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng-ust you are using, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and how you setup >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your tracing session. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is a description of what I have tried and noticed: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1- The problem isn't consistent. It sometimes happen and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sometimes works as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expected. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2- From my experiments, the problem happens (more frequently >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at least) when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adding performance counter contexts (I tried cycles, cpu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _cycles and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instructions). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3- I am testing using lu _ ncb from splash3 benchmark suite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after setting LD _ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PRELOAD to use the pthread wrapper as described in the LTTng >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4- Here is the backtrace printed after exiting: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ======= Backtrace : ========= >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /lib64/ libc .so.6([Thread 0x7ffff5611700 ( LWP 97229) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exited] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust .so.0( lttng >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _destroy_context+0x35)[0x7ffff7471575] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust .so.0( lttng >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _session_destroy+0x21c)[0x7ffff747363c] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .so.0(+0x1e906)[0x7ffff746d906] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust .so.0( lttng _ ust _ objd _ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unref >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +0x9f)[0x7ffff746dccf] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust .so.0( lttng _ ust _ objd _ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unref >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +0x9f)[0x7ffff746dccf] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust .so.0( lttng _ ust _ objd _ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unref >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +0x9f)[0x7ffff746dccf] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust .so.0( lttng _ ust _ abi >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _exit+0x68)[0x7ffff746ead8] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .so.0(+0x191d3)[0x7ffff74681d3] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / usr /local/lib/ liblttng - ust .so.0( lttng _ ust >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _exit+0x67)[0x7ffff745ed57] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /lib64/ ld - linux -x86-64.so.2(+0xf85a)[0x7ffff7dec85a] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /lib64/ libc .so.6(+0x38a49)[0x7ffff6ca6a49] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /lib64/ libc .so.6(+0x38a95)[0x7ffff6ca6a95] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / aenao -99/elsayed9/ LTTng /data/scripts/ tmp / lu _ ncb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0x401b51] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /lib64/ libc .so.6(__ libc _start_main+0xf5)[0x7ffff6c8fb35] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / aenao -99/elsayed9/ LTTng /data/scripts/ tmp / lu _ ncb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0x401c44] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5- Also, this is a backtrace I obtained from gdb : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #0 0x00007ffff6eac1d7 in raise () from /lib64/ libc .so.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x00007ffff6ead8c8 in abort () from /lib64/ libc .so.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x00007ffff6eebf07 in __ libc _message () from /lib64/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> libc .so.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x00007ffff6ef3503 in _int_free () from /lib64/ libc .so.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x00007ffff768ad25 in lttng _destroy_ perf _counter_field >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> field=<optimized out>) at lttng -context- perf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -counters.c:418 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #5 0x00007ffff767a575 in lttng _destroy_context ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ctx =0x7ffff0011090) at lttng -context.c:278 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #6 0x00007ffff767c63c in _ lttng _channel_ unmap ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng _ chan =0x7ffff0010f40) at lttng -events.c:172 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #7 lttng _session_destroy (session=0x7ffff0000900) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at lttng -events.c:247 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #8 0x00007ffff7676906 in lttng _release_session ( >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> objd =<optimized out>) at lttng - ust - abi .c:601 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #9 0x00007ffff7676ccf in lttng _ ust _ objd _ unref (id=1, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is_owner=<optimized out>) at lttng - ust - abi .c:216 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #10 0x00007ffff7676ccf in lttng _ ust _ objd _ unref (id=2, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is_owner=<optimized out>) at lttng - ust - abi .c:216 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #11 0x00007ffff7676ccf in lttng _ ust _ objd _ unref >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (id=id@entry=18, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is_owner=is_owner@entry=1) at lttng - ust - abi .c:216 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #12 0x00007ffff7677ad8 in objd _table_destroy () >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at lttng - ust - abi .c:235 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #13 lttng _ ust _ abi _exit () at lttng - ust - abi .c:1002 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #14 0x00007ffff76711d3 in lttng _ ust _cleanup (exiting=1) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at lttng - ust -comm.c:1807 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #15 0x00007ffff7667d57 in lttng _ ust _exit () >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at lttng - ust -comm.c:1874 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #16 0x00007ffff7dec85a in _ dl _ fini () >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from /lib64/ ld - linux -x86-64.so.2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #17 0x00007ffff6eafa49 in __run_exit_handlers () >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from /lib64/ libc .so.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #18 0x00007ffff6eafa95 in exit () from /lib64/ libc .so.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #19 0x0000000000401b51 in main ( argc =<optimized out>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argv =<optimized out>) at lu .c:368 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas, why this happens and how to fix it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shehab >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ mailto:lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org | >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>>>>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>>>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>>>> -- >>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>>>> EfficiOS Inc. >>>>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] >>> -- >>> Mathieu Desnoyers >>> EfficiOS Inc. >>> [ http://www.efficios.com/ | http://www.efficios.com ] -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
_______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
