[dtrace-discuss] Question on pid provider for 'static' C functions

[Andreas.Haas at Sun.COM]

Hi all,

last year in October we discussed in this thread the requirements for pid-provider probes 
to function. Outcome was that pid provider can be used as long as no_inline #pragma is used 
to ensure C functions will be found by dtrace as documented in

    http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6480235

now we have an issue in our Dtrace monitor for Sun Grid Engine master

    http://wiki.gridengine.info/wiki/index.php/Dtrace#Implementation

the issue is that one particular pid-provider is not found anymore by Dtrace 
when Sun Studio compiler v12 is used. But when the same C module is compiled with 
Sun Studio v10 the pid-provider for the function gets found and the monitor works!

Regarding compile options nothing changed ("-Xc -v -fast -xchip=generic 
-xcache=generic -ftrap=division -KPIC") excpet Sun Studio v10 option 
"-xarch=amd64" became Studio compiler v12 "-m64". Curiously 'dbx' does find 
the function when 'stop in sge_mirror_process_events' is used and in 'nm' 
output shows no difference either:

Sun Studio v10

    nm sge_mirror.o | grep process_events
    [63]    |         14800|        4292|FUNC |GLOB |0    |2 |sge_mirror_process_events

Sun Stuido v12

    nm sge_mirror.o | grep process_events
    [67]    |         10016|         982|FUNC |GLOB |0    |2 |sge_mirror_process_events

note, the 'nm' output unveils the functions object became much smaller. Also we 
noticed our binary distribution size went down from 32MB to 24MB.

Anyone knowing of a Sun Studio compiler v12 degradation that matches this 
phenomenon?

Thanks,
Andreas

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Andreas.Haas at Sun.COM wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Adam Leventhal wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 03:32:33PM +0200, Andreas.Haas at Sun.COM wrote:
>>> (1) I think the inlined function caveat must be mentioned in the
>>>     "pid Provider" chapter of "Solaris Dynamic Tracing Guide"
>>>
>>>        http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-6223/6mlkidlls?q=dtrace&a=view
>>>
>>>     Adam, please let me know, if I somehow can help to get this fixed in
>>>     the dtrace docs.
>> 
>> I completely agree. Please file a bug though opensolaris.org in the 
>> category
>> doc/dtrace.
>
> Done. It's #6480235.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
> _______________________________________________
> dtrace-discuss mailing list
> dtrace-discuss at opensolaris.org
>