Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 8/7/12 4:34 AM, Yuri wrote: > On 04/16/2012 06:59, John Baldwin wrote: >> I'm fine with putting it into the base. If so, we should import 1.2 >> first I >> think and then apply the 1.3 patch. > > So are there plans to import it into the base? Maybe for 9.1? > /usr/ports/sysutils/pstack is still i386 only. > Try this version [1]. I plan to update sysutils/pstack to it. [1] https://github.com/z0nt/pstack -- Andrey Zonov signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 04/16/2012 06:59, John Baldwin wrote: I'm fine with putting it into the base. If so, we should import 1.2 first I think and then apply the 1.3 patch. So are there plans to import it into the base? Maybe for 9.1? /usr/ports/sysutils/pstack is still i386 only. Yuri ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
Konstantin Belousov wrote: > My opinion is that such tool should be imported into the base. Why? Don't optional tools belong in ports? ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On Sunday, April 15, 2012 5:30:29 am Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 01:54:42AM -0700, Yuri wrote: > > On 04/05/2012 07:06, John Baldwin wrote: > > >In this case we probably should become the upstream maintainer. My patch > > >actually bumps the version to 1.3 as it is sort of intended to do that. > > > > bsd-pstack on SourceForge is dead. Sole project owner isn't responsive, > > and as per SF policy they don't allow anyone to take over such project. > > They suggest to fork. > > So will you object if I create a new project on SF, say bsd-pstack-new, > > will import the current source and apply your patch and make a release? > > I will also update pstack port so that it will become current. > It seems that the license is two-clause BSD. > My opinion is that such tool should be imported into the base. I'm fine with putting it into the base. If so, we should import 1.2 first I think and then apply the 1.3 patch. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack? ++sysutils/timelimit
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:00:08PM -0700, Yuri wrote: > On 04/15/2012 02:30, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > It seems that the license is two-clause BSD. > > My opinion is that such tool should be imported into the base. > > I agree, this is the best option. This is a very low level tool, > somewhat similar to or extending procstat(1). > Every once in a while when this comes up it makes me think of this. sysutils/timelimit BSD licensed and the maintainer is more than willing to maintain it. And gets rid of the problem with colliding with timelimit from netpipes-4.2 which happens to be a pain to use. -- ;s =; pgp1qOl9YSa9k.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 04/15/2012 02:30, Konstantin Belousov wrote: It seems that the license is two-clause BSD. My opinion is that such tool should be imported into the base. I agree, this is the best option. This is a very low level tool, somewhat similar to or extending procstat(1). Yuri ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 01:54:42AM -0700, Yuri wrote: > On 04/05/2012 07:06, John Baldwin wrote: > >In this case we probably should become the upstream maintainer. My patch > >actually bumps the version to 1.3 as it is sort of intended to do that. > > bsd-pstack on SourceForge is dead. Sole project owner isn't responsive, > and as per SF policy they don't allow anyone to take over such project. > They suggest to fork. > So will you object if I create a new project on SF, say bsd-pstack-new, > will import the current source and apply your patch and make a release? > I will also update pstack port so that it will become current. It seems that the license is two-clause BSD. My opinion is that such tool should be imported into the base. pgpbsUd2J0Dvf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 04/05/2012 07:06, John Baldwin wrote: In this case we probably should become the upstream maintainer. My patch actually bumps the version to 1.3 as it is sort of intended to do that. bsd-pstack on SourceForge is dead. Sole project owner isn't responsive, and as per SF policy they don't allow anyone to take over such project. They suggest to fork. So will you object if I create a new project on SF, say bsd-pstack-new, will import the current source and apply your patch and make a release? I will also update pstack port so that it will become current. Yuri ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 5 April 2012 10:06, John Baldwin wrote: > In this case we probably should become the upstream maintainer. My patch > actually bumps the version to 1.3 as it is sort of intended to do that. Yay! Can you please roll a new tarball and host in ~/public_distfiles or something of a similar nature? That way we could just point the port at the distfile and we don't have to maintain a seperate patchfile in the ports tree. -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On Thursday, April 05, 2012 7:43:15 am Eitan Adler wrote: > On 4 April 2012 15:29, Julian Elischer wrote: > > but we do add patches to make things work on FreeBSD. > > We add patches to make ports... > ... work on FreeBSD > ... conform to FreeBSD hier (to an extent) > ... work with alternate compilers, PREFIX, etc. > > We shouldn't add patches which "continue development". In all cases > the goal should be to upstream the patch ASAP. If there is no active > upstream and the patch does more than the above that is a sign that > someone needs to be willing to become the upstream maintainer first. In this case we probably should become the upstream maintainer. My patch actually bumps the version to 1.3 as it is sort of intended to do that. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 4 April 2012 15:29, Julian Elischer wrote: > but we do add patches to make things work on FreeBSD. We add patches to make ports... ... work on FreeBSD ... conform to FreeBSD hier (to an extent) ... work with alternate compilers, PREFIX, etc. We shouldn't add patches which "continue development". In all cases the goal should be to upstream the patch ASAP. If there is no active upstream and the patch does more than the above that is a sign that someone needs to be willing to become the upstream maintainer first. -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 4/4/12 5:44 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: On 4 April 2012 01:41, Julian Elischer wrote: should be in ports? Not unless someone decides to become the new upstream and make a release. We do not maintain software in ports. but we do add patches to make things work on FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
There are plenty of patches in the ports tree. At which point do you call it maintaining within the ports tree ? 8 files changed, 796 insertions(+), 233 deletions(-) Is hardly what someone should call maintaining considering the size of some of the other patches. And besides someone was willing to contribute the patch... no sense in degrading their work if they were willing to put it up for consumption. On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 08:44:31AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 4 April 2012 01:41, Julian Elischer wrote: > > should be in ports? > > Not unless someone decides to become the new upstream and make a > release. We do not maintain software in ports. > > -- > Eitan Adler > ___ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" -- ;s =; ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 04/04/2012 05:44, Eitan Adler wrote: Not unless someone decides to become the new upstream and make a release. We do not maintain software in ports. -- Eitan Adler But upstream is the sourceforge. Even though there is no activity there for a long while, it is easy to join that project, commit the change and make a release. It's better than to keep private patches. Yuri ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 4 April 2012 01:41, Julian Elischer wrote: > should be in ports? Not unless someone decides to become the new upstream and make a release. We do not maintain software in ports. -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 4 Apr 2012 06:41, "Julian Elischer" wrote: > > On 4/2/12 10:12 AM, John Baldwin wrote: >> >> On Monday, April 02, 2012 12:39:26 pm Yuri wrote: >>> >>> On 04/02/2012 05:31, John Baldwin wrote: Hmm, I don't know if the port has it, but I did some work on pstack a while ago to make it work with libthread_db so it at least handles i386 ok. It needs to be modified to use something like libunwind though or some other unwinder. And possibly it should use libelf instead of its own ELF-parsing code. >>> >>> I see pstack -1.2_1 failing even on i386: >>> >>> pstack: cannot read context for thread 0x1879f >>> pstack: failed to read more threads >> >> Yes, threads don't work for modern binaries (newer than 4.x) without my changes >> to make it use libthread_db. You can find the patch I used for this at >> http://www.freebsd.org/~jhb/patches/pstack_threads.patch > > > should be in ports? > > I'm on it. Chris ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 4/2/12 10:12 AM, John Baldwin wrote: On Monday, April 02, 2012 12:39:26 pm Yuri wrote: On 04/02/2012 05:31, John Baldwin wrote: Hmm, I don't know if the port has it, but I did some work on pstack a while ago to make it work with libthread_db so it at least handles i386 ok. It needs to be modified to use something like libunwind though or some other unwinder. And possibly it should use libelf instead of its own ELF-parsing code. I see pstack -1.2_1 failing even on i386: pstack: cannot read context for thread 0x1879f pstack: failed to read more threads Yes, threads don't work for modern binaries (newer than 4.x) without my changes to make it use libthread_db. You can find the patch I used for this at http://www.freebsd.org/~jhb/patches/pstack_threads.patch should be in ports? ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On Monday, April 02, 2012 12:39:26 pm Yuri wrote: > On 04/02/2012 05:31, John Baldwin wrote: > > Hmm, I don't know if the port has it, but I did some work on pstack a while > > ago to make it work with libthread_db so it at least handles i386 ok. It > > needs to be modified to use something like libunwind though or some other > > unwinder. And possibly it should use libelf instead of its own ELF-parsing > > code. > > I see pstack -1.2_1 failing even on i386: > > pstack: cannot read context for thread 0x1879f > pstack: failed to read more threads Yes, threads don't work for modern binaries (newer than 4.x) without my changes to make it use libthread_db. You can find the patch I used for this at http://www.freebsd.org/~jhb/patches/pstack_threads.patch -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 04/02/2012 05:31, John Baldwin wrote: Hmm, I don't know if the port has it, but I did some work on pstack a while ago to make it work with libthread_db so it at least handles i386 ok. It needs to be modified to use something like libunwind though or some other unwinder. And possibly it should use libelf instead of its own ELF-parsing code. I see pstack -1.2_1 failing even on i386: pstack: cannot read context for thread 0x1879f pstack: failed to read more threads 1947: /usr/local/share/chromium/chrome - thread 100255 - 0x1879f () - thread -1 (running) - 0x389f1df9 __sys_recvmsg (3, bfbfcd44, 0, bfbfcd68, 0, c) + 5 0x97850b4 _init (3, bfbfcdc8, 800, bfbfdc20, bfbfdc4c, bfbfdc40) + 15c7c1c 0xa8089d0 _init (bfbfe074, 3, 0, bfbfe0c4, 20, bfbfdca0) + 264b538 0xa8094d7 _init (bfbfe44c, 0, bfbfe108, 37a85517, 37aa7680, 38fbf400) + 264c03f 0x8e7ec02 _init (bfbfe44c, bfbfe4a0, 3c, 0, 0, 0) + cc176a 0x8e7f102 _init (bfbfe468, bfbfe44c, bfbfe4a0, 37a9f4b4, 37aa5d40, 1) + cc1c6a 0x8e7f471 _init (2, bfbfe540, bfbfe4a0, 88f9c28, bd4dce8, bd4de88) + cc1fd9 0x81c64ab _init (2, bfbfe540, bfbfe4e8, af61795, bfbfe500, bfbfe540) + 9013 0x81c6452 _init (0, 0, bfbfe518, 81c63a7, 2, bfbfe540) + 8fba 0x81c63a7 _init (3791afd0, 2, bfbfe540, 0, 0, 0) + 8f0f 0x81c6318 _init (bfbfe6d0, bfbfe6f1, 0, bfbfe6ff, bfbfe762, bfbfe7b8) + 8e80 Yuri ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On Saturday, March 31, 2012 3:41:41 pm Yuri wrote: > I look at seemingly abandoned sysutils/pstack, last modified upstream > 2002-11-27. > It doesn't really work on 9.0 i386, prints some errors. > > It's functions, though, is quite desirable if one wants to understand > why some multithreaded program hangs or is not responsive. > Since there were no updates, I wonder, is this because there is some > alternative in FreeBSD that I don't know about, or it is primarily due > to the lack of interest/resources? > > I don't take gdb as alternative since it is not single line, and also it > has some threading issues of its own. Hmm, I don't know if the port has it, but I did some work on pstack a while ago to make it work with libthread_db so it at least handles i386 ok. It needs to be modified to use something like libunwind though or some other unwinder. And possibly it should use libelf instead of its own ELF-parsing code. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
On 03/31/2012 14:22, Jason Hellenthal wrote: procstat(1) I don't see which key of procstat(1) displays this information. The closest key is: -k "Display the stacks of kernel threads in the process" It shows kernel threads, but no user space stacks. How can I get user space stacks? Yuri ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
procstat(1) On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:41:41PM -0700, Yuri wrote: > I look at seemingly abandoned sysutils/pstack, last modified upstream > 2002-11-27. > It doesn't really work on 9.0 i386, prints some errors. > > It's functions, though, is quite desirable if one wants to understand > why some multithreaded program hangs or is not responsive. > Since there were no updates, I wonder, is this because there is some > alternative in FreeBSD that I don't know about, or it is primarily due > to the lack of interest/resources? > > I don't take gdb as alternative since it is not single line, and also it > has some threading issues of its own. > > Yuri > ___ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" -- ;s =; ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Is there any modern alternative to pstack?
I look at seemingly abandoned sysutils/pstack, last modified upstream 2002-11-27. It doesn't really work on 9.0 i386, prints some errors. It's functions, though, is quite desirable if one wants to understand why some multithreaded program hangs or is not responsive. Since there were no updates, I wonder, is this because there is some alternative in FreeBSD that I don't know about, or it is primarily due to the lack of interest/resources? I don't take gdb as alternative since it is not single line, and also it has some threading issues of its own. Yuri ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
