Re: [lttng-dev] Correctly using callstack-user context

On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 10:18, Genevieve Bastien via lttng-dev < lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org> wrote: > We had a very very experimental branch with it, using backtrace first, > then unwind. But it is not suggested, not performant. It's far from the > correct desired implementation, for which Mathieu c

Re: [lttng-dev] Correctly using callstack-user context

Hi Christophe, On 5/13/20 9:42 AM, Christophe Bédard via lttng-dev wrote: > > On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 08:27, Mathieu Desnoyers > > wrote: > > How does your test program issue the system call ? Is it directly > with syscall() (see syscall(2) man page),

Re: [lttng-dev] Correctly using callstack-user context

On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 08:27, Mathieu Desnoyers < mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com> wrote: > How does your test program issue the system call ? Is it directly with > syscall() (see syscall(2) man page), or > does it call into libc ? Is your entire libc compiled with > -fno-omit-frame-pointer ? > In

Re: [lttng-dev] Correctly using callstack-user context

- On May 11, 2020, at 5:09 PM, lttng-dev wrote: > Hi, > As part of a big software safety certification effort, we are looking into > making sure that some functions of our API do not allocate memory and do not > use any blocking syscalls. > This part is done and is working (using kmem_mm_pa