Question about map.increment()
#bcc
Donald Hunter
Is there a reason why map.increment() internally copies the key into a stack variable? When building a key inline, it uses double the stack space and incurs the cost of a copy. For u64 keys this is fine but for larger custom keys, e.g. containing a char[] it blows up the stack pretty quickly.
Thanks, Donald. |
Re: [libbpf] Questions about XDP/TC
Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
chenhengqi@... writes:
1. How do I attach `BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS`/`classifier` BPF programs to specific data path(i.e. ingress or egress) using libbpf ?libbpf does not yet support attaching to TC hooks, but there is work in progress to add this. See https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210325120020.236504-4-memxor@gmail.com/ (an updated version should hopefully show up soon). I found some comments related in the source:Just set XDP_FLAGS_SKB_MODE or XDP_FLAGS_DRV_MODE when attaching... -Toke |
[libbpf] Questions about XDP/TC
chenhengqi@...
1. How do I attach `BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS`/`classifier` BPF programs to specific data path(i.e. ingress or egress) using libbpf ?
I found some comments related in the source:
```
The **BPF_F_INGRESS** value in *flags* is used to make the distinction (ingress path is selected if the flag is present, egress path otherwise).
```
How can I get that flag, am I missing something ?
2. How do I attach `XDP` BPF programs using specific mode(i.e. xdpgeneric/xdpdrv)?
I tried googling but most of them lead to tc/ip tools. Thanks in advance. |
Re: libffi trampolines and stack traces? : was Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Bradley Schatz
Thanks for your help with this - and for the sketch of how to proceed with it.
I'm going to look into the feasibility of fixing the frame pointer in the trampoline before attempting what you have outlined. Cheers! On 18/4/21, 3:37 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 12:56 PM Yonghong Song via lists.iovisor.org <ys114321=gmail.com@...> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 11:09 PM Bradley Schatz > <bradley@...> wrote: > > > > I still digging into this issue, and have hacked memleak/bcc to show addresses when they cant be resolved. In other places, I'm seeing jit complied java stack frames showing up alongside C ones, which is the expected behaviour when using Java with -XX:+PreserveFramePointer. > > > > I'm still seeing these allocation traces with only two frames per the below. > > > > 11534336 bytes in 11 allocations from stack > > [7efeebb115d4 unknown] [jna7632521838566054573.tmp ] > > [7efec27f7440 unknown] [perf-15445.map] > > 14680064 bytes in 14 allocations from stack > > [7efeebb115d4 unknown] [jna7632521838566054573.tmp ] > > [7efec27f7380 unknown] [perf-15445.map] > > > > I suspect the lower frame above is a libffi generated trampoline. Are there any known issues with the eBPF stack tracing infrastructure and such trampolines? Workarounds? > > The bpf stack unwinder is using the kernel one which is the frame > pointer based and it may have issues with generated trampoline code > which may mess up frame pointer based stack chain. One possibility is > to use perf call-graph "dwarf" mode to get the raw data to user space > and use more powerful library like libunwind etc. to unwind the stack. > But I haven't do this together with bpf program yet, and cannot > describe whether and how to do "dwarf" call-graph with bpf program > together. I briefly looked at the perf and kernel code and experimented with perf dwarf mode. It is possible for bpf to copy user stack to user space. You could do the following: - when you do perf event open, the sample_type needs to be set properly. The following is what callchain dwarf mode had: sample_type = PERF_SAMPLE_IP|PERF_SAMPLE_TID|PERF_SAMPLE_TIME| PERF_SAMPLE_ADDR|PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN|PERF_SAMPLE_CPU| PERF_SAMPLE_PERIOD|PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER| PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER|PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC I do not think you need all of them, you definitely need PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER, maybe you can PERF_SAMPLE_RAW and PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER to see whether it works or not. In kernel header file linux:include/linux/perf_event.h, we have struct perf_sample_data { ... struct perf_regs regs_user; struct perf_regs regs_intr; u64 stack_user_size; } If you have access to perf_sample_data, you can read regs_user and find stack pointer and then you can copy some bytes (say 2KB) to user space for analysis. Using perf_event_output may be too expensive. perf is using user mmap memory. You can also use a map for this purpose. How to access perf_sample_data? Typically sampling bpf program has the signature like int do_sample(struct bpf_perf_event_data *ctx) During program run, the program really got the following ctx struct bpf_perf_event_data_kern { bpf_user_pt_regs_t *regs; struct perf_sample_data *data; struct perf_event *event; }; So you can use bpf_probe_read_kernel() to get 'data' and then other information inside perf_sample_data. You can experiment this way if you really like to see whether it can solve your problem or not. If it works, I guess we can add a bpf helper to do the copy as such copy length tends to be big. > > > > > Thanks, > > Bradley > > > > > > > > On 7/4/21, 9:04 pm, "Bradley Schatz" <bradley@...> wrote: > > > > > What does '[unknown] [perf-18047.map]' mean? Does this mean > > > perf-18047.map is not found? If the perf-<pid>.map file cannot be found, > > > symbolization won't be possible. Maybe you want to double check this? > > > > The file perf-18047.map is there and from other parts of the stack trace I can see it being used to successfully resolve symbols. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > On 7/4/21, 4:44 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:08 PM Bradley Schatz > > <bradley@...> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the suggestion. I found a tunable to keep the JNI shared library in memory after loading. As you can see below, it is no longer showing as deleted. > > > > > > 13238272 bytes in 404 allocations from stack > > > [unknown] [jna2576903844543447777.tmp] > > > [unknown] [perf-18047.map] > > > > I have no experience with perf-map-agent, but the following is what I guess: > > [perf-18047.map] is used to find the mapping between address and symbol. > > What does '[unknown] [perf-18047.map]' mean? Does this mean > > perf-18047.map is not found? If the perf-<pid>.map file cannot be found, > > symbolization won't be possible. Maybe you want to double check this? > > > > > > > > No improvement in granularity though. > > > > > > In the VM I'm using -XX:+PreserveFramePointer -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:+DebugNonSafepoints. In perf_maps_agent, I'm using "unfoldall" > > > > > > Any other suggestions? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/4/21, 2:42 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:25 PM Bradley Schatz > > > <bradley@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I’m just starting to come to grips with bcc & perf-map-agent for introspecting java on linux, with the goal of identifying what appears to be an off-heap memory leak (using memleak). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I appear to be getting reliable stack decoding for jvm library code and for jit’ed java methods (see below for an example of the former). However I am seeing some very short stack traces which don’t seem to decode (the latter three stacks of below). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It’s looking to me like the frame starting with “jna…” is likely the native JNI shared library for the FFI library “JNA”. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any suggestions as to why these latter three are so brief and/or how I can increase the resolution? > > > > > > I can see the file has been marked as deleted. > > > > > > 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack > > > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > > > 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack > > > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > > > So the file has been removed in userspace and current bcc won't be > > > pass to parse it since it takes the file name as > > > "jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)" > > > The file name is actually taken from /proc/<pid>/maps. > > > > > > I am not sure whether you can hack to parse "jna9005484735610534564.tmp" or not. > > > But I would consider it is unsafe to do that as the original file > > > related info may just > > > exist in kernel and there is a reference to it. For user space, it is > > > either gone or > > > could be replaced by something else. So the safest way is to find a place to > > > do symbolization before file is gone or keep tmp file a little bit longer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apologies if this is the wrong place for such a question. Thank you for your help. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > > > Bradley > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 119408 bytes in 71 allocations from stack > > > > > > > > os::malloc(unsigned long, MemoryType, NativeCallStack const&)+0xb5 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > CodeBlob::set_oop_maps(OopMapSet*) [clone .part.5]+0x75 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > CodeBlob::CodeBlob(char const*, CodeBuffer*, int, int, int, int, OopMapSet*)+0xe3 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > nmethod::nmethod(Method*, int, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x4d [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > nmethod::new_nmethod(methodHandle, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x219 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > ciEnv::register_method(ciMethod*, int, CodeOffsets*, int, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int, bool, bool, RTMState)+0x1b1 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > Compile::Compile(ciEnv*, C2Compiler*, ciMethod*, int, bool, bool, bool)+0xe60 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > C2Compiler::compile_method(ciEnv*, ciMethod*, int)+0xa3 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > CompileBroker::invoke_compiler_on_method(CompileTask*)+0x808 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > CompileBroker::compiler_thread_loop()+0x6d8 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > JavaThread::thread_main_inner()+0x1c7 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > JavaThread::run()+0x2fa [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > java_start(Thread*)+0x102 [libjvm.so] > > > > > > > > start_thread+0xf3 [libpthread-2.28.so] > > > > > > > > 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack > > > > > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > > > > > 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack > > > > > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > > > > > 295698432 bytes in 282 allocations from stack > > > > > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > |
Re: libffi trampolines and stack traces? : was Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Yonghong Song
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 12:56 PM Yonghong Song via lists.iovisor.org
<ys114321=gmail.com@...> wrote: I briefly looked at the perf and kernel code and experimented with perf dwarf mode. It is possible for bpf to copy user stack to user space. You could do the following: - when you do perf event open, the sample_type needs to be set properly. The following is what callchain dwarf mode had: sample_type = PERF_SAMPLE_IP|PERF_SAMPLE_TID|PERF_SAMPLE_TIME| PERF_SAMPLE_ADDR|PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN|PERF_SAMPLE_CPU| PERF_SAMPLE_PERIOD|PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER| PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER|PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC I do not think you need all of them, you definitely need PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER, maybe you can PERF_SAMPLE_RAW and PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER to see whether it works or not. In kernel header file linux:include/linux/perf_event.h, we have struct perf_sample_data { ... struct perf_regs regs_user; struct perf_regs regs_intr; u64 stack_user_size; } If you have access to perf_sample_data, you can read regs_user and find stack pointer and then you can copy some bytes (say 2KB) to user space for analysis. Using perf_event_output may be too expensive. perf is using user mmap memory. You can also use a map for this purpose. How to access perf_sample_data? Typically sampling bpf program has the signature like int do_sample(struct bpf_perf_event_data *ctx) During program run, the program really got the following ctx struct bpf_perf_event_data_kern { bpf_user_pt_regs_t *regs; struct perf_sample_data *data; struct perf_event *event; }; So you can use bpf_probe_read_kernel() to get 'data' and then other information inside perf_sample_data. You can experiment this way if you really like to see whether it can solve your problem or not. If it works, I guess we can add a bpf helper to do the copy as such copy length tends to be big.
|
Re: libffi trampolines and stack traces? : was Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Yonghong Song
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 11:09 PM Bradley Schatz
<bradley@...> wrote: The bpf stack unwinder is using the kernel one which is the frame pointer based and it may have issues with generated trampoline code which may mess up frame pointer based stack chain. One possibility is to use perf call-graph "dwarf" mode to get the raw data to user space and use more powerful library like libunwind etc. to unwind the stack. But I haven't do this together with bpf program yet, and cannot describe whether and how to do "dwarf" call-graph with bpf program together.
|
libffi trampolines and stack traces? : was Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Bradley Schatz
I still digging into this issue, and have hacked memleak/bcc to show addresses when they cant be resolved. In other places, I'm seeing jit complied java stack frames showing up alongside C ones, which is the expected behaviour when using Java with -XX:+PreserveFramePointer.
I'm still seeing these allocation traces with only two frames per the below. 11534336 bytes in 11 allocations from stack [7efeebb115d4 unknown] [jna7632521838566054573.tmp ] [7efec27f7440 unknown] [perf-15445.map] 14680064 bytes in 14 allocations from stack [7efeebb115d4 unknown] [jna7632521838566054573.tmp ] [7efec27f7380 unknown] [perf-15445.map] I suspect the lower frame above is a libffi generated trampoline. Are there any known issues with the eBPF stack tracing infrastructure and such trampolines? Workarounds? Thanks, Bradley On 7/4/21, 9:04 pm, "Bradley Schatz" <bradley@...> wrote: > What does '[unknown] [perf-18047.map]' mean? Does this mean > perf-18047.map is not found? If the perf-<pid>.map file cannot be found, > symbolization won't be possible. Maybe you want to double check this? The file perf-18047.map is there and from other parts of the stack trace I can see it being used to successfully resolve symbols. Thanks! On 7/4/21, 4:44 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:08 PM Bradley Schatz <bradley@...> wrote: > > Thanks for the suggestion. I found a tunable to keep the JNI shared library in memory after loading. As you can see below, it is no longer showing as deleted. > > 13238272 bytes in 404 allocations from stack > [unknown] [jna2576903844543447777.tmp] > [unknown] [perf-18047.map] I have no experience with perf-map-agent, but the following is what I guess: [perf-18047.map] is used to find the mapping between address and symbol. What does '[unknown] [perf-18047.map]' mean? Does this mean perf-18047.map is not found? If the perf-<pid>.map file cannot be found, symbolization won't be possible. Maybe you want to double check this? > > No improvement in granularity though. > > In the VM I'm using -XX:+PreserveFramePointer -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:+DebugNonSafepoints. In perf_maps_agent, I'm using "unfoldall" > > Any other suggestions? > > Thanks! > > > > > On 3/4/21, 2:42 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:25 PM Bradley Schatz > <bradley@...> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I’m just starting to come to grips with bcc & perf-map-agent for introspecting java on linux, with the goal of identifying what appears to be an off-heap memory leak (using memleak). > > > > > > > > I appear to be getting reliable stack decoding for jvm library code and for jit’ed java methods (see below for an example of the former). However I am seeing some very short stack traces which don’t seem to decode (the latter three stacks of below). > > > > > > > > It’s looking to me like the frame starting with “jna…” is likely the native JNI shared library for the FFI library “JNA”. > > > > > > > > Any suggestions as to why these latter three are so brief and/or how I can increase the resolution? > > I can see the file has been marked as deleted. > > 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > So the file has been removed in userspace and current bcc won't be > pass to parse it since it takes the file name as > "jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)" > The file name is actually taken from /proc/<pid>/maps. > > I am not sure whether you can hack to parse "jna9005484735610534564.tmp" or not. > But I would consider it is unsafe to do that as the original file > related info may just > exist in kernel and there is a reference to it. For user space, it is > either gone or > could be replaced by something else. So the safest way is to find a place to > do symbolization before file is gone or keep tmp file a little bit longer. > > > > > > > > Apologies if this is the wrong place for such a question. Thank you for your help. > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Bradley > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 119408 bytes in 71 allocations from stack > > > > os::malloc(unsigned long, MemoryType, NativeCallStack const&)+0xb5 [libjvm.so] > > > > CodeBlob::set_oop_maps(OopMapSet*) [clone .part.5]+0x75 [libjvm.so] > > > > CodeBlob::CodeBlob(char const*, CodeBuffer*, int, int, int, int, OopMapSet*)+0xe3 [libjvm.so] > > > > nmethod::nmethod(Method*, int, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x4d [libjvm.so] > > > > nmethod::new_nmethod(methodHandle, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x219 [libjvm.so] > > > > ciEnv::register_method(ciMethod*, int, CodeOffsets*, int, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int, bool, bool, RTMState)+0x1b1 [libjvm.so] > > > > Compile::Compile(ciEnv*, C2Compiler*, ciMethod*, int, bool, bool, bool)+0xe60 [libjvm.so] > > > > C2Compiler::compile_method(ciEnv*, ciMethod*, int)+0xa3 [libjvm.so] > > > > CompileBroker::invoke_compiler_on_method(CompileTask*)+0x808 [libjvm.so] > > > > CompileBroker::compiler_thread_loop()+0x6d8 [libjvm.so] > > > > JavaThread::thread_main_inner()+0x1c7 [libjvm.so] > > > > JavaThread::run()+0x2fa [libjvm.so] > > > > java_start(Thread*)+0x102 [libjvm.so] > > > > start_thread+0xf3 [libpthread-2.28.so] > > > > 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > 295698432 bytes in 282 allocations from stack > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > > > > > > |
Re: Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Bradley Schatz
What does '[unknown] [perf-18047.map]' mean? Does this meanThe file perf-18047.map is there and from other parts of the stack trace I can see it being used to successfully resolve symbols. Thanks! On 7/4/21, 4:44 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:08 PM Bradley Schatz <bradley@...> wrote: > > Thanks for the suggestion. I found a tunable to keep the JNI shared library in memory after loading. As you can see below, it is no longer showing as deleted. > > 13238272 bytes in 404 allocations from stack > [unknown] [jna2576903844543447777.tmp] > [unknown] [perf-18047.map] I have no experience with perf-map-agent, but the following is what I guess: [perf-18047.map] is used to find the mapping between address and symbol. What does '[unknown] [perf-18047.map]' mean? Does this mean perf-18047.map is not found? If the perf-<pid>.map file cannot be found, symbolization won't be possible. Maybe you want to double check this? > > No improvement in granularity though. > > In the VM I'm using -XX:+PreserveFramePointer -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:+DebugNonSafepoints. In perf_maps_agent, I'm using "unfoldall" > > Any other suggestions? > > Thanks! > > > > > On 3/4/21, 2:42 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:25 PM Bradley Schatz > <bradley@...> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I’m just starting to come to grips with bcc & perf-map-agent for introspecting java on linux, with the goal of identifying what appears to be an off-heap memory leak (using memleak). > > > > > > > > I appear to be getting reliable stack decoding for jvm library code and for jit’ed java methods (see below for an example of the former). However I am seeing some very short stack traces which don’t seem to decode (the latter three stacks of below). > > > > > > > > It’s looking to me like the frame starting with “jna…” is likely the native JNI shared library for the FFI library “JNA”. > > > > > > > > Any suggestions as to why these latter three are so brief and/or how I can increase the resolution? > > I can see the file has been marked as deleted. > > 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > So the file has been removed in userspace and current bcc won't be > pass to parse it since it takes the file name as > "jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)" > The file name is actually taken from /proc/<pid>/maps. > > I am not sure whether you can hack to parse "jna9005484735610534564.tmp" or not. > But I would consider it is unsafe to do that as the original file > related info may just > exist in kernel and there is a reference to it. For user space, it is > either gone or > could be replaced by something else. So the safest way is to find a place to > do symbolization before file is gone or keep tmp file a little bit longer. > > > > > > > > Apologies if this is the wrong place for such a question. Thank you for your help. > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Bradley > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 119408 bytes in 71 allocations from stack > > > > os::malloc(unsigned long, MemoryType, NativeCallStack const&)+0xb5 [libjvm.so] > > > > CodeBlob::set_oop_maps(OopMapSet*) [clone .part.5]+0x75 [libjvm.so] > > > > CodeBlob::CodeBlob(char const*, CodeBuffer*, int, int, int, int, OopMapSet*)+0xe3 [libjvm.so] > > > > nmethod::nmethod(Method*, int, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x4d [libjvm.so] > > > > nmethod::new_nmethod(methodHandle, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x219 [libjvm.so] > > > > ciEnv::register_method(ciMethod*, int, CodeOffsets*, int, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int, bool, bool, RTMState)+0x1b1 [libjvm.so] > > > > Compile::Compile(ciEnv*, C2Compiler*, ciMethod*, int, bool, bool, bool)+0xe60 [libjvm.so] > > > > C2Compiler::compile_method(ciEnv*, ciMethod*, int)+0xa3 [libjvm.so] > > > > CompileBroker::invoke_compiler_on_method(CompileTask*)+0x808 [libjvm.so] > > > > CompileBroker::compiler_thread_loop()+0x6d8 [libjvm.so] > > > > JavaThread::thread_main_inner()+0x1c7 [libjvm.so] > > > > JavaThread::run()+0x2fa [libjvm.so] > > > > java_start(Thread*)+0x102 [libjvm.so] > > > > start_thread+0xf3 [libpthread-2.28.so] > > > > 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > 295698432 bytes in 282 allocations from stack > > > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > > > > > > |
Re: Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Yonghong Song
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:08 PM Bradley Schatz
<bradley@...> wrote: I have no experience with perf-map-agent, but the following is what I guess: [perf-18047.map] is used to find the mapping between address and symbol. What does '[unknown] [perf-18047.map]' mean? Does this mean perf-18047.map is not found? If the perf-<pid>.map file cannot be found, symbolization won't be possible. Maybe you want to double check this?
|
LPC 2021 Networking and BPF Track CFP
Daniel Borkmann
We are pleased to announce the Call for Proposals (CFP) for the Networking and
BPF track at the 2021 edition of the Linux Plumbers Conference (LPC), which is planned to be held in Dublin, Ireland, on September 27th - 29th, 2021. Note that if an in-person conference should prove to be impossible due to the circumstances at that time, Linux Plumbers will switch to a virtual-only conference. CFP submitters should ideally be able to give their presentation in person, if circumstances permit, although presenting remotely will always be possible. This year's Networking and BPF track technical committee is comprised of: David S. Miller <davem@...> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...> Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...> Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...> We are seeking proposals of 40 minutes in length (including Q&A discussion), optionally accompanied by papers of 2 to 10 pages in length. Any kind of advanced Linux networking and/or BPF related topic will be considered. Please submit your proposals through the official LPC website at: https://linuxplumbersconf.org/event/11/abstracts/ Make sure to select "Networking & BPF Summit" in the Track pull-down menu. Proposals must be submitted by August 13th, and submitters will be notified of acceptance by August 16th. Final slides and papers (as PDF) are due on the first day of the conference. |
Re: Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Bradley Schatz
Thanks for the suggestion. I found a tunable to keep the JNI shared library in memory after loading. As you can see below, it is no longer showing as deleted.
13238272 bytes in 404 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna2576903844543447777.tmp] [unknown] [perf-18047.map] No improvement in granularity though. In the VM I'm using -XX:+PreserveFramePointer -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:+DebugNonSafepoints. In perf_maps_agent, I'm using "unfoldall" Any other suggestions? Thanks! On 3/4/21, 2:42 am, "Y Song" <ys114321@...> wrote: On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:25 PM Bradley Schatz <bradley@...> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I’m just starting to come to grips with bcc & perf-map-agent for introspecting java on linux, with the goal of identifying what appears to be an off-heap memory leak (using memleak). > > > > I appear to be getting reliable stack decoding for jvm library code and for jit’ed java methods (see below for an example of the former). However I am seeing some very short stack traces which don’t seem to decode (the latter three stacks of below). > > > > It’s looking to me like the frame starting with “jna…” is likely the native JNI shared library for the FFI library “JNA”. > > > > Any suggestions as to why these latter three are so brief and/or how I can increase the resolution? I can see the file has been marked as deleted. 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] [unknown] [perf-31566.map] 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] [unknown] [perf-31566.map] So the file has been removed in userspace and current bcc won't be pass to parse it since it takes the file name as "jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)" The file name is actually taken from /proc/<pid>/maps. I am not sure whether you can hack to parse "jna9005484735610534564.tmp" or not. But I would consider it is unsafe to do that as the original file related info may just exist in kernel and there is a reference to it. For user space, it is either gone or could be replaced by something else. So the safest way is to find a place to do symbolization before file is gone or keep tmp file a little bit longer. > > > > Apologies if this is the wrong place for such a question. Thank you for your help. > > > > Kind regards, > > Bradley > > > > > > > > > > 119408 bytes in 71 allocations from stack > > os::malloc(unsigned long, MemoryType, NativeCallStack const&)+0xb5 [libjvm.so] > > CodeBlob::set_oop_maps(OopMapSet*) [clone .part.5]+0x75 [libjvm.so] > > CodeBlob::CodeBlob(char const*, CodeBuffer*, int, int, int, int, OopMapSet*)+0xe3 [libjvm.so] > > nmethod::nmethod(Method*, int, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x4d [libjvm.so] > > nmethod::new_nmethod(methodHandle, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x219 [libjvm.so] > > ciEnv::register_method(ciMethod*, int, CodeOffsets*, int, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int, bool, bool, RTMState)+0x1b1 [libjvm.so] > > Compile::Compile(ciEnv*, C2Compiler*, ciMethod*, int, bool, bool, bool)+0xe60 [libjvm.so] > > C2Compiler::compile_method(ciEnv*, ciMethod*, int)+0xa3 [libjvm.so] > > CompileBroker::invoke_compiler_on_method(CompileTask*)+0x808 [libjvm.so] > > CompileBroker::compiler_thread_loop()+0x6d8 [libjvm.so] > > JavaThread::thread_main_inner()+0x1c7 [libjvm.so] > > JavaThread::run()+0x2fa [libjvm.so] > > java_start(Thread*)+0x102 [libjvm.so] > > start_thread+0xf3 [libpthread-2.28.so] > > 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > 295698432 bytes in 282 allocations from stack > > [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] > > [unknown] [perf-31566.map] > > > > |
Re: Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Yonghong Song
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:25 PM Bradley Schatz
<bradley@...> wrote: I can see the file has been marked as deleted. 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] [unknown] [perf-31566.map] 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] [unknown] [perf-31566.map] So the file has been removed in userspace and current bcc won't be pass to parse it since it takes the file name as "jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)" The file name is actually taken from /proc/<pid>/maps. I am not sure whether you can hack to parse "jna9005484735610534564.tmp" or not. But I would consider it is unsafe to do that as the original file related info may just exist in kernel and there is a reference to it. For user space, it is either gone or could be replaced by something else. So the safest way is to find a place to do symbolization before file is gone or keep tmp file a little bit longer.
|
Overly brief stack traces for Java/linux ?
Bradley Schatz
Hi,
I’m just starting to come to grips with bcc & perf-map-agent for introspecting java on linux, with the goal of identifying what appears to be an off-heap memory leak (using memleak).
I appear to be getting reliable stack decoding for jvm library code and for jit’ed java methods (see below for an example of the former). However I am seeing some very short stack traces which don’t seem to decode (the latter three stacks of below).
It’s looking to me like the frame starting with “jna…” is likely the native JNI shared library for the FFI library “JNA”.
Any suggestions as to why these latter three are so brief and/or how I can increase the resolution?
Apologies if this is the wrong place for such a question. Thank you for your help.
Kind regards, Bradley
119408 bytes in 71 allocations from stack os::malloc(unsigned long, MemoryType, NativeCallStack const&)+0xb5 [libjvm.so] CodeBlob::set_oop_maps(OopMapSet*) [clone .part.5]+0x75 [libjvm.so] CodeBlob::CodeBlob(char const*, CodeBuffer*, int, int, int, int, OopMapSet*)+0xe3 [libjvm.so] nmethod::nmethod(Method*, int, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x4d [libjvm.so] nmethod::new_nmethod(methodHandle, int, int, CodeOffsets*, int, DebugInformationRecorder*, Dependencies*, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int)+0x219 [libjvm.so] ciEnv::register_method(ciMethod*, int, CodeOffsets*, int, CodeBuffer*, int, OopMapSet*, ExceptionHandlerTable*, ImplicitExceptionTable*, AbstractCompiler*, int, bool, bool, RTMState)+0x1b1 [libjvm.so] Compile::Compile(ciEnv*, C2Compiler*, ciMethod*, int, bool, bool, bool)+0xe60 [libjvm.so] C2Compiler::compile_method(ciEnv*, ciMethod*, int)+0xa3 [libjvm.so] CompileBroker::invoke_compiler_on_method(CompileTask*)+0x808 [libjvm.so] CompileBroker::compiler_thread_loop()+0x6d8 [libjvm.so] JavaThread::thread_main_inner()+0x1c7 [libjvm.so] JavaThread::run()+0x2fa [libjvm.so] java_start(Thread*)+0x102 [libjvm.so] start_thread+0xf3 [libpthread-2.28.so] 34603008 bytes in 33 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] [unknown] [perf-31566.map] 96468992 bytes in 92 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] [unknown] [perf-31566.map] 295698432 bytes in 282 allocations from stack [unknown] [jna9005484735610534564.tmp (deleted)] [unknown] [perf-31566.map]
|
Re: Questions about runqlen
Abel Wu
Hi Y Song,
On 3/21/21 1:38 AM, Y Song wrote: On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:00 AM Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...> wrote:Loop is forbidden in BPF programs (although bounded loop isCould you file an "issue" for the question? This issue, the supported from linux-5.3, tracking down to NULL se->parent is un-bounded). Maybe it's worth trying to get the definition of struct rq? I will PR if made some progress. Thanks, Abel
|
Re: Questions about runqlen
Yonghong Song
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:00 AM Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...> wrote:
Could you file an "issue" for the question? This issue, the questions/answers can be easily tracked. There are some answers in this issue: https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/issues/3093 To be accurate for cgroup/task-group environments, you may need to traverse to the root. Could you check and experiment whether this can solve your issue? if this is the case, we may need to enhance runqlen.py. Maybe you could help provide a pull request? Thanks!
|
Re: BCC and passing packet from XDP to user-mode app
#bcc
Yonghong Song
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 4:49 AM Federico Parola
<federico.parola@...> wrote: Thanks, Federico and others. Maybe one of you can add it to the reference_guide.md? We do have events.perf_submit there. Thanks!
|
Re: BCC and passing packet from XDP to user-mode app
#bcc
Federico Parola
Hi,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
the virtual function you are looking for is perf_submit_skb(): https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/c8de00e1746e242cdcd68b4673a083bb467cd35e/src/cc/export/helpers.h#L193 Strangely it is not documented in the reference guide. Best regards, Federico Parola On 18/03/21 10:29, v.a.bonert@... wrote:
Hi! |
BCC and passing packet from XDP to user-mode app
#bcc
Hi!
Is it possible to pass full ethernet packet from XDP to user-mode app using BCC?
I wrote C code like this:
BPF_PERF_OUTPUT(captured_data);
int capture(struct xdp_md *ctx)
{
captured_data.perf_submit(ctx, ...);
return XDP_PASS; }
But there is no flags argument in perf_submit function (but bpf_perf_event_output has such argument).
Without BCC I can write such code to pass full packet to user-mode:
struct packet_info
{
uint32_t packet_len;
uint32_t iface_id;
};
struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") captured_data =
{
.type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY,
.key_size = sizeof(u32),
.value_size = sizeof(u32),
.max_entries = MAX_CPUS
};
SEC("xdp")
int capture_kern(struct xdp_md *ctx)
{
u32 len = ctx->data_end - ctx->data;
u64 flags = BPF_F_CURRENT_CPU;
flags |= (u64)len << 32;
struct packet_info info = {len, ctx->ingress_ifindex};
bpf_perf_event_output(ctx, &captured_data, flags, &info, sizeof(info));
return XDP_PASS;
}
How can I do the same when using BCC? |
Re: Which file should I include for KERNEL_VERSION macro ?
Andrii Nakryiko
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 5:10 AM <chenhengqi@...> wrote:
It will soon be part of bpf_helpers.h, but meanwhile just copy/paste it into your code. See https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20210317200510.1354627-2-andrii@kernel.org/ |
Which file should I include for KERNEL_VERSION macro ?
chenhengqi@...
I'v read this blog post
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
https://facebookmicrosites.github.io/bpf/blog/2020/02/19/bpf-portability-and-co-re.html And want to apply this technique to my program: extern u32 LINUX_KERNEL_VERSION __kconfig; extern u32 CONFIG_HZ __kconfig; u64 utime_ns; if (LINUX_KERNEL_VERSION >= KERNEL_VERSION(4, 11, 0)) utime_ns = BPF_CORE_READ(task, utime); else /* convert jiffies to nanoseconds */ utime_ns = BPF_CORE_READ(task, utime) * (1000000000UL / CONFIG_HZ); |