That's what it was. All of the t_* functions are just wrapper
functions that call the corresponding _tx_* function. Darn tail calls.
Adam Leventhal wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> Functions that end in a tail-call to another function can report an
> incorrect
> return value in the arg1 variable. Take a look at the disassembly at the
> location where you're seeing the apparently invalid return values to
> confirm
> that it's a tail-call.
>
> It can be a little confusing -- sorry about that.
>
> Adam
>
> On Jun 25, 2008, at 5:09 AM, Brian Utterback wrote:
>
>> I am trying to trace the xti functions in a process. I am using the
>> following script:
>>
>> #!/usr/sbin/dtrace -s
>> pid$target::t_*:entry
>> {
>> }
>> pid$target::t_*:return
>> {
>> printf("%x %d",arg0,arg1);
>> }
>>
>>
>> My problem is that the value of arg1 that I get is mostly 50 or 48,
>> although I have seen large numbers like 642832 and 768712. The thing
>> is, the t_* functions almost all return either a 0 or -1. I thought I
>> must be missing something simple, like a copying or 32/64 bit thing,
>> but I just don't see what the problem is. Any ides?
>> --
>> blu
>>
>> There are two rules in life:
>> Rule 1- Don't tell people everything you know
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Brian Utterback - Solaris RPE, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>> Ph:877-259-7345, Em:brian.utterback-at-ess-you-enn-dot-kom
>> _______________________________________________
>> dtrace-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>
>
> --
> Adam Leventhal, Fishworks http://blogs.sun.com/ahl
>
> _______________________________________________
> dtrace-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
--
blu
There are two rules in life:
Rule 1- Don't tell people everything you know
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Utterback - Solaris RPE, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Ph:877-259-7345, Em:brian.utterback-at-ess-you-enn-dot-kom
_______________________________________________
dtrace-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
