On Friday 13 August 2010, Hywel Richards wrote: > Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Thursday 12 August 2010, Hywel Richards wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Is anyone using oprofile? > >> > >> I'm getting segfaults from opreport at the moment, and I'm not sure if > >> it is opreport, or just me. > > > > I've tried the steps you outline below and it works for me (updated C5.5 > > as of 10m ago). My only guess is that your binary is b0rked. What happens > > if you do "opreport -l" instead of "opreport -l /tmp/myprog"? Was myprog > > compiled with "-g"? > > > > And just to be sure, could you provide "uname -a" and "rpm -q oprofile". > > > > /Peter > > "opreport -l" gives: > > warning: /no-vmlinux could not be found. > warning: [vdso] (tgid:11369 range:0xdc9000-0xdca000) could not be found. > warning: [vdso] (tgid:2453 range:0x154000-0x155000) could not be found. ... > warning: [vdso] (tgid:6643 range:0xfaa000-0xfab000) could not be found. > CPU: Core Solo / Duo, speed 800 MHz (estimated) > Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Unhalted clock cycles) with a unit mask > of 0x00 (Unhalted core cycles) count 100000 > bfd_get_section_contents:get_debug:: Bad value I guess that means that there is a problem with the data collected. All the warnings about vdso ranges that can't be found is strange (I don't get that here). Are the tgids in that list special in any way? Is this on a single machine or on several? Do you know if this strange behaviour persists over reboots? Anything strange in ~/.oprofile? If you don't have customizations remove it and let oprofile re-create it. > myprog was not compiled with -g, but that shouldn't be a requirement, > right? No you're right ... > "uname -a" gives: > > Linux myhost 2.6.18-194.11.1.el5 #1 SMP Tue Aug 10 19:09:06 EDT 2010 > i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux I notice that you're on 32-bit while I'm on x86_64. That may or may not be relevant. I don't have any 32-bit machines around to test on though. > "rpm -q oprofile" gives: > > oprofile-0.9.4-15.el5 > > I also did an "rpm -V oprofile" - no problems. No harm in being paranoid :-) /Peter -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20100813/937e34dd/attachment-0004.sig>