Hi *,
I have been playing with perf-probe tool and I found out that some bogus
values of a function argument are obtained by perf-record.
How to reproduce:
gcc -O0 -g -o dummy dummy.c
perf probe -x ./dummy --add 'isprime a'
perf record -e probe_dummy:isprime ./dummy
perf script
The actual output looks like the following:
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838454: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=32767
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838504: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=32714
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838513: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=3
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838519: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=4
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838525: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=5
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838531: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=6
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838537: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=7
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838543: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=13
dummy 32476 [000] 3534401.838561: probe_dummy:isprime: (400530) a=17
But if you look into the source, you can see that the function isprime()
is called with the following arguments:
int numbers[] = { 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 17, 19 };
So the first and last ones are omitted, there are some bogus numbers instead
of them and all that is shifted somehow.
Note that when I probe for %ax register it looks correct.
The version of kernel/perf is 4.3.0. The architecture is x86_64.
Am I missing something or is it a bug?
Thank you!
Michael
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int isprime(int a)
{
int i;
if(a <= 1)
return 0;
for(i = 2; i <= a / 2; i++)
if(!(a % i))
return 0;
return 1;
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int numbers[] = { 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 17, 19 };
int i;
for(i = 0; i < 9; i++)
{
printf("%i %s prime\n", numbers[i], (isprime(numbers[i]))? "is" : "is not");
}
return 0;
}