Re: kernel module code coverage
I didn't realize it was going to get updated so soon, but the versions on that page were at "8.16.5" for the Windows and Linux versions when I sent my email a couple days ago. It also appears the versions for the OSs aren't all updated at the same time (.6 seems to only includes Windows/macOS fixes), so it's still possible we'll see 8.16.6 or 8.16.7 for FreeBSD later, absent any official messaging. On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 11:08 AM Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote: > Eric Joyner wrote: > > > I'm reviving an ancient thread, but is Bullseye truly dropping FreeBSD > > support? Do you have a link to something that shows that? > > > > I still see a FreeBSD tarball in their download archive page for the > newest > > version of their tool, which seems to be 8.16.5. > > It appears that the "archive" is for older releases. The latest is 8.16.6 > and > isn't listed for FreeBSD: > > https://www.bullseye.com/cgi-bin/download > > Cheers, Jamie > ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
Eric Joyner wrote: > I'm reviving an ancient thread, but is Bullseye truly dropping FreeBSD > support? Do you have a link to something that shows that? > > I still see a FreeBSD tarball in their download archive page for the newest > version of their tool, which seems to be 8.16.5. It appears that the "archive" is for older releases. The latest is 8.16.6 and isn't listed for FreeBSD: https://www.bullseye.com/cgi-bin/download Cheers, Jamie ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 8:38 AM Ed Maste wrote: > > > > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting > > > coverage information from the kernel. > > > > > That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. > > No, /dev/kcov is independent of, and predates, Matt Macy's work. It > provides broadly the same sort of information, but not using the same > interface. GCOV also depends on GCC - probably limiting its potential use cases largely to vendor CI. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
> > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting > > coverage information from the kernel. > > > That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. No, /dev/kcov is independent of, and predates, Matt Macy's work. It provides broadly the same sort of information, but not using the same interface. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
I'm reviving an ancient thread, but is Bullseye truly dropping FreeBSD support? Do you have a link to something that shows that? I still see a FreeBSD tarball in their download archive page for the newest version of their tool, which seems to be 8.16.5. - Eric On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 12:08 PM Alan Somers wrote: > Read the bug report. I can't even load modules when I build with GCOV. > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 1:04 PM Matthew Macy wrote: > > > > The whole point of adding gcov support was for integrating with the > > ZoL CI framework which does coverage. So it very much does work with > > modules. Not sure where that comes from. > > -M > > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 6:52 AM Alan Somers wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. > > > > > > > > > > We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time > analysis. > > > > > Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). > > > > > > > > > > Any suggestions that work for you? > > > > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting > > > > coverage information from the kernel. > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Slava > > > > > > That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it > > > works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. > > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 > > > -Alan > > > ___ > > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
The whole point of adding gcov support was for integrating with the ZoL CI framework which does coverage. So it very much does work with modules. Not sure where that comes from. -M On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 6:52 AM Alan Somers wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: > > > > > > Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. > > > > > > We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. > > > Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). > > > > > > Any suggestions that work for you? > > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting > > coverage information from the kernel. > > > > Best regards > > Michael > > > > > > > > > Slava > > That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it > works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 > -Alan > ___ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
Read the bug report. I can't even load modules when I build with GCOV. On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 1:04 PM Matthew Macy wrote: > > The whole point of adding gcov support was for integrating with the > ZoL CI framework which does coverage. So it very much does work with > modules. Not sure where that comes from. > -M > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 6:52 AM Alan Somers wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: > > > > > > > > Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. > > > > > > > > We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. > > > > Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). > > > > > > > > Any suggestions that work for you? > > > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting > > > coverage information from the kernel. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > Slava > > > > That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it > > works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 > > -Alan > > ___ > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
> On 8. Aug 2019, at 15:52, Alan Somers wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: >>> >>> Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. >>> >>> We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. >>> Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). >>> >>> Any suggestions that work for you? >> Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting >> coverage information from the kernel. >> >> Best regards >> Michael >>> >>> >>> Slava > > That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it > works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 > -Alan I think it came from Andrew... So you might assign the bug to him or at least get him in the loop. Best regards Michael ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
On 08-Aug-19 18:14, Michael Tuexen wrote: On 8. Aug 2019, at 16:16, Slava Shwartsman wrote: On 08-Aug-19 16:52, Alan Somers wrote: On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote: On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). Any suggestions that work for you? Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting coverage information from the kernel. Thanks. Is there a man page for /dev/kcov? I don't think so. There was no man page in the commit which introduced the feature: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision=342962 You might want to look at: https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/tools/kcovtrace/kcovtrace.c how to use it. Best regards Michael Best regards Michael Slava That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. In worst case, I can build my module into the kernel, right? https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 -Alan Slava Thanks Michael and Alan. Slava ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
> On 8. Aug 2019, at 16:16, Slava Shwartsman wrote: > > > > On 08-Aug-19 16:52, Alan Somers wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). Any suggestions that work for you? >>> Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting >>> coverage information from the kernel. >>> > > Thanks. > Is there a man page for /dev/kcov? I don't think so. There was no man page in the commit which introduced the feature: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision=342962 You might want to look at: https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/tools/kcovtrace/kcovtrace.c how to use it. Best regards Michael > >>> Best regards >>> Michael Slava >> That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it >> works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. > > In worst case, I can build my module into the kernel, right? > >> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 >> -Alan > > > Slava ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
On 08-Aug-19 16:52, Alan Somers wrote: On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote: On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). Any suggestions that work for you? Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting coverage information from the kernel. Thanks. Is there a man page for /dev/kcov? Best regards Michael Slava That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. In worst case, I can build my module into the kernel, right? https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 -Alan Slava ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote: > > > > > On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: > > > > Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. > > > > We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. > > Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). > > > > Any suggestions that work for you? > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting > coverage information from the kernel. > > Best regards > Michael > > > > > > Slava That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?. However, while it works for the kernel itself, it doesn't work for modules. https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239194 -Alan ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
> On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote: > > Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. > > We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. > Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). > > Any suggestions that work for you? Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting coverage information from the kernel. Best regards Michael > > > Slava > ___ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: kernel module code coverage
In message , Slava Shwartsman writes: >Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. > >We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. >Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). > >Any suggestions that work for you? Back in early days, I fixed it so that all the BB-counter blocks in the kernel were linked into a list which could be read out through /dev/(k)mem, and I belive I added a program to do that, named something like "kernbb". Today I would probably have made a subtree under sysctl where the counters could be pulled out per source-file... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
kernel module code coverage
Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD. We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis. Mostly interested in code coverage (for now). Any suggestions that work for you? Slava ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
