Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-09-10 Thread Emilio Coppa
Hi Josef, You are completely right. The calls into PLT are printed if > "--skip-plt=no" is specified. Then, the results should look > a lot better. Perfect :) > Looks like the places where dl_runtime_resolve() "returns" into the > resolved > functions. Not sure what you are doing wrong here, b

Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-09-09 Thread Josef Weidendorfer
On Saturday 10 September 2011, Emilio Coppa wrote: > > a() > > PLT() > > > b() > > But if you print: > > a () > > > b() > > So you can think (erroneously) that b() is called from a(). You are completely right. The calls into PLT are printed if "--skip-plt=no" is specified. Then, the results shou

Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-09-09 Thread Emilio Coppa
Hi Josef, sorry for my delay in answering you :( So there must be something wrong with the --ct-verbose=1 output you got. Yes, probably because you do not show PLT, so if you have this flow 1) start function a() 2) return function a() and go in a PLT 3) start function b() You should print this

Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-09-01 Thread Josef Weidendorfer
On Thursday 25 August 2011, Emilio Coppa wrote: > > Hmm... strlen shouldn't need to call calloc, so your output seems to be > > sane. ... > > Can you locate the relevant output of "valgrind --tool=callgrind > > --ct-verbose=2 ..."? Thanks! There are a lot of strlen called here, but all end with r

Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-08-25 Thread Emilio Coppa
Hi Josef, > Hmm... strlen shouldn't need to call calloc, so your output seems to be > sane. > Ok. In the next days I try to trace function entry/exit with a tool based on PIN on the same program, I hope I can understand more about differences between my code and callgrind. It's not easy to catch

Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-08-25 Thread Josef Weidendorfer
On Wednesday 24 August 2011, Emilio Coppa wrote: > >. > strlen(0x40183b6, 0xbe918faa, ...) [ld-2.13.so / 0x16c20] > >. > calloc(0x2e9, 0x1, ...) [ld-2.13.so / 0x14dd0] > >. > 0x000174ab(0xbe918194, 0x401cff4, ...) [ld-2.13.so / 0x174ab] > >. .> malloc(0x2e9, 0x401cff4, ...) [ld

Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-08-24 Thread Emilio Coppa
Hi Josef, thanks for your reply :) Can you show us an example of the differences you get? > My output and callgrind output.See the difference it's a little bit caotic, sorry. For example (line numbers on the left), callgrind says: >

Re: [Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-08-24 Thread Josef Weidendorfer
On Wednesday 24 August 2011, Emilio Coppa wrote: > Hi > > I am trying to write a new tool. For my purpose i need to track function > entry/exit, I read tracking-fn-entry-exit.txt and see some code of callgrind > (it's not easy to isolate the code that i need), but I am not so good and so > I have

[Valgrind-users] Tracking function call

2011-08-24 Thread Emilio Coppa
Hi I am trying to write a new tool. For my purpose i need to track function entry/exit, I read tracking-fn-entry-exit.txt and see some code of callgrind (it's not easy to isolate the code that i need), but I am not so good and so I have some problem. I write some code that basically insert a call