Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-17 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 14:44:41 +0100 Andreas Ziegler wrote: > Hi, > > On 1/17/19 10:47 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100 > > Andreas Ziegler wrote: > > > >> On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900 > >>> Masami

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-17 Thread Greg Kroah-Hartman
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 02:44:41PM +0100, Andreas Ziegler wrote: > Hi, > > On 1/17/19 10:47 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100 > > Andreas Ziegler wrote: > > > > > On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900 > > > >

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-17 Thread Andreas Ziegler
Hi, On 1/17/19 10:47 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100 Andreas Ziegler wrote: On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100 Andreas Ziegler wrote: I went into this

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-17 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100 Andreas Ziegler wrote: > On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900 > > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100 > >> Andreas Ziegler wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> I went into this a bit deeper

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-17 Thread Andreas Ziegler
On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100 >> Andreas Ziegler wrote: >> >>> >>> I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing >>> to parse the code because there is

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-17 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100 > Andreas Ziegler wrote: > > > > > I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing > > to parse the code because there is no FETCH_OP_COMM case in > > process_fetch_insn()

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-16 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100 Andreas Ziegler wrote: > > I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing > to parse the code because there is no FETCH_OP_COMM case in > process_fetch_insn() for uprobes so that will return -EILSEQ, leading to > a make_data_loc(0,

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-16 Thread Andreas Ziegler
Hi, thanks for your reply! On 1/16/19 11:00 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:36:48 +0100 Andreas Ziegler wrote: Hi again, On 1/14/19 1:38 PM, Andreas Ziegler wrote: Hi, I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird behaviour/output when

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-16 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:36:48 +0100 Andreas Ziegler wrote: > Hi again, > > On 1/14/19 1:38 PM, Andreas Ziegler wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird > > behaviour/output when using more than one string argument (or using the > > $comm

Re: uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-15 Thread Andreas Ziegler
Hi again, On 1/14/19 1:38 PM, Andreas Ziegler wrote: Hi, I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird behaviour/output when using more than one string argument (or using the $comm argument). This was run on a v4.20 mainline build on Ubuntu 18.04.

uprobes: bug in comm/string output?

2019-01-14 Thread Andreas Ziegler
Hi, I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird behaviour/output when using more than one string argument (or using the $comm argument). This was run on a v4.20 mainline build on Ubuntu 18.04. root@ubuntu1810:~# uname -a Linux ubuntu1810 4.20.0-042000-generic