crash cannot find stack info on ppc64le
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
crash (Ubuntu) |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Chris J Arges | ||
Trusty |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Chris J Arges |
Bug Description
SRU Justification
[Impact]
crash's sub-command cannot show stack frame of active tasks on ppc64le systems.
[Test Case]
1. capturing a vmcore by kdump on ppc64le system
2. issuing crash with this vmcore
3. run 'bt' in crash
4. no stack frame displaied
[Fix]
https:/
[Regression potential]
This is easily testable and only affects ppc64le systems. This has already been backported to vivid without issue.
--
Problem Description
=======
crash's sub-command cannot show stack frame of active tasks on ppc64le systems. Please see
https:/
for details.
Contact Information = Ping Tian <email address hidden>, Mikhail <email address hidden>
---uname output---
Linux thymelp2.
Machine Type = CHRP IBM,8247-22L lpar
Steps to Reproduce
=======
1. capturing a vmcore by kdump on ppc64le system
2. issuing crash with this vmcore
3. run 'bt' in crash
4. no stack frame displaied
Userspace tool common name: crash
The userspace tool has the following bit modes: 64-bit
Userspace rpm: crash-7.
== Comment: #5 - Hari Krishna Bathini <email address hidden> - 2015-02-06 13:18:18 ==
For active tasks, there are two methods to get backtrace.
Firstly, using pt_note registers. If this fails,
use default stack search method to get backtrace.
In ppc64le, currently both methods seem to fail.
The below patch resolves problem in default stack search method.
https:/
This effectively resolves this bug.
But the problem with first method is still open.
I couldn't look into the problem with first method yet.
Will try to work on this next week.
Thanks
Hari
== Comment: #6 - Hari Krishna Bathini <email address hidden> - 2015-02-20 00:08:46 ==
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Any update?
>
> For active tasks, there are two methods to get backtrace.
> Firstly, using pt_note registers. If this fails,
> use default stack search method to get backtrace.
> In ppc64le, currently both methods seem to fail.
> The below patch resolves problem in default stack search method.
> https:/
> dc4ea682a21567d
> This effectively resolves this bug.
>
> But the problem with first method is still open.
> I couldn't look into the problem with first method yet.
> Will try to work on this next week.
>
> Thanks
> Hari
I would suggest, we close this bug as the issue reported is resolved with the below patch
https:/
We could track the problem with first method offline or in a separate bug if needed.
Thanks
Hari
== Comment: #10 - Breno Henrique Leitao <email address hidden> - 2015-03-02 15:42:05 ==
Canonical,
Can we move Crash to versin 7.1.0 that already contains this fix?
Thanks.
== Comment: #11 - Hari Krishna Bathini <email address hidden> - 2015-03-05 23:18:17 ==
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > Any update?
> >
> > For active tasks, there are two methods to get backtrace.
> > Firstly, using pt_note registers. If this fails,
> > use default stack search method to get backtrace.
> > In ppc64le, currently both methods seem to fail.
> > The below patch resolves problem in default stack search method.
> > https:/
> > dc4ea682a21567d
> > This effectively resolves this bug.
> >
> > But the problem with first method is still open.
> > I couldn't look into the problem with first method yet.
> > Will try to work on this next week.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Hari
>
> I would suggest, we close this bug as the issue reported is resolved with
> the below patch
> https:/
> dc4ea682a21567d
>
> We could track the problem with first method offline or in a separate bug if
> needed.
Further, this is more of an alternative approach for getting backtrace.
So, the problem I mentioned here doesn't have any issues in terms of functionality
with regard to this bug or any other for that matter.
Since, there are no issues in terms of functionality, I am not sure on whether to raise a bug.
It is on my TODO list and I am thinking of chasing this offline..
Thanks
Hari
tags: | added: architecture-ppc64le bugnameltc-120594 severity-high targetmilestone-inin--- |
affects: | ubuntu → crash (Ubuntu) |
tags: |
added: targetmilestone-inin1504 removed: targetmilestone-inin--- |
Changed in crash (Ubuntu): | |
assignee: | nobody → Chris J Arges (arges) |
status: | New → In Progress |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
Changed in crash (Ubuntu Trusty): | |
assignee: | nobody → Chris J Arges (arges) |
importance: | Undecided → Medium |
status: | New → In Progress |
description: | updated |
tags: |
added: verification-done removed: verification-needed |
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. It seems that your bug report is not filed about a specific source package though, rather it is just filed against Ubuntu in general. It is important that bug reports be filed about source packages so that people interested in the package can find the bugs about it. You can find some hints about determining what package your bug might be about at https:/ /wiki.ubuntu. com/Bugs/ FindRightPackag e. You might also ask for help in the #ubuntu-bugs irc channel on Freenode.
To change the source package that this bug is filed about visit https:/ /bugs.launchpad .net/ubuntu/ +bug/1429250/ +editstatus and add the package name in the text box next to the word Package.
[This is an automated message. I apologize if it reached you inappropriately; please just reply to this message indicating so.]