Logging/printf's in RT env
adam at os.inf.tu-dresden.de
Tue Aug 9 01:03:13 CEST 2005
On Mon Aug 08, 2005 at 20:28:16 +0200, Rene Wittmann wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 03:09:12PM +0200, Adam Lackorzynski wrote:
> > On Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 13:45:12 +0200, Rene Wittmann wrote:
> > > I have also the problem that I want to output some of my symbols+values
> > > during the execution of my application.
> > > Furthermore I'm working in the RT scheduling mode (with APIC one shot
> > > mode).
> > >
> > > I have three timeslices:
> > > 1. mandatory
> > > 2. optional
> > > 3. "mandatory" (if part of optional was executed)
> > >
> > > The preempter recognizes timeslice overruns and sets a
> > > global variable, the working thread checks this variable and therefore
> > > knows about those "events".
> > >
> > > This works fine if my priorites are set to 50,30,50,
> > > but fails after a few periods with a pagefault if setting the priorities to
> > > 200,190,200.
> > >
> > > In each part I use some calls to LOG() to output a few things I'm
> > > interested in. If I leave out those LOG()-calls, it works also with the
> > > high priorites (200,190,200).
> > > So I assume, there's a LOG-buffer overflow (as the LOG priority is not
> > > that high)?
> > >
> > > Could I prevent this by using printf instead of LOG or is LOG just a
> > > kind of macro for printf?
> > printf is usually also a log function.
> > The priorities of the logserver are at 32, so in the first example
> > they're inbetween and in the latter one completely below.
> > Does the PF go away when you add --prio 210 (or similar) as an argument
> > to log?
> Yes, it goes away.
> But I thought that, if you have a real-time application running it will
> not be influenced by some "time-sharing" application as the logserver
> should be.
Well, if you use it... see Martins reply...
> > Can you send me a backtrace with unstripped binaries when the PF
> > happens? Thanks.
> Sure, I can if you tell me how to do it...
> The exact error message is:
> app| L4RM: [PF] write at 0x01306f58, eip 0380e48b, src 9.02
> app| [9.0] l4rm/lib/src/pagefault.c:78:__unknown_pf():
> app| unhandled page fault
This message alone doesn't help me much as I need to know where in terms
of source code it happened. The EIP alone is only useful to find the
position in the binary.
> And then it enters the kernel debugger.
> I've compiled my program with "CFLAGS = -g" so it should be unstripped,
Binaries are stripped on install, configured in the configuration menu
in the l4 directory. Just disable it there and relink your binary.
> But when typing "bt<CR>" in the kernel debugger, there are no symbols
> and the output just looks like this
> #4 f000763b
> #5 f0027332
> #6 f000e718
> #7 f000627a
> #8 f000e1fd
> #9 f000627a
> #10 f000e1fd
> #11 f000acb0
> #12 f0005f6d
> #13 f000627a
> #14 f0006280
> #15 f0005c3f
> #16 f000627a
> #17 f0006280
> #18 f0005aec
> #19 f999c5f5
> #20 f00176ed
> #21 f0006d54
> #22 f0027300
> #23 f000cfa5
> #24 f0006a5a
> #25 f000784b
> #26 f00272dc
> So I don't expect any helpful information in there or is it?
And additionally this is a kernel backtrace, I want to see the other
> my grub config looks like this:
> title llv1_decode (all layers, log locally)
> root (hd0,2)
> kernel /drops/bin/x86_586/l4v2/rmgr -sigma0
> modaddr 0x08000000
> module /l4/kernel/fiasco/build/fiasco_apic -nokdb -nowait -serial -serial_esc
> module /drops/bin/x86_586/l4v2/sigma0
> module /drops/bin/x86_586/l4v2/log_net -net -local -ip 220.127.116.11 -buffer 4096
> module /drops/bin/x86_586/l4v2/names
> module /drops/bin/x86_586/l4v2/dm_phys
> module /drops/bin/x86_586/l4v2/simple_ts
> module /drops/bin/x86_586/l4v2/app
> OK, this modaddr seems huge, but my data is just linked to the binary
> and I need this huge value...
If it works, fine.
> So how would one produce a useful backtrace inside fiasco? Or is there a
> way to use another debugger (gdb?)?
You can also use 'objdump -ldS app' and post the code around the
pagefault EIP, so you know where it happens. But a backtrace is useful
Adam adam at os.inf.tu-dresden.de
More information about the l4-hackers