This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: Does anybody have a tapset to get the command line of a task?
- From: Richard J Moore <richardj_moore at uk dot ibm dot com>
- To: "Yi Feng" <ericyifeng at gmail dot com>
- Cc: systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:57:45 +0100
- Subject: Re: Does anybody have a tapset to get the command line of a task?
- Sensitivity:
Sorry, I have been on vacation. Now I look at my scipt I realise it uses
execname(), which is standard. It doesn't attempt to extract the full
command line.
- -
Richard J Moore
IBM Advanced Linux Response Team - Linux Technology Centre
MOBEX: 264807; Mobile (+44) (0)7739-875237
Office: (+44) (0)1962-817072
"Yi Feng"
<ericyifeng@gma
il.com> To
Richard J Moore/UK/IBM@IBMGB
30/05/2006 cc
18:43 systemtap@sources.redhat.com
bcc
Subject
Re: Does anybody have a tapset to
get the command line of a task?
Just want to let you know, I'm still looking forward to your script. :)
Thanks,
Yi Feng
On 5/25/06, Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Yes, I believe I have, but it's on a different system so will post later
> unless someone else does.
> - -
> Richard J Moore
> IBM Advanced Linux Response Team - Linux Technology Centre
> MOBEX: 264807; Mobile (+44) (0)7739-875237
> Office: (+44) (0)1962-817072
>
>
>
> "Yi Feng"
> <ericyifeng@gma
> il.com>
To
> Sent by: systemtap@sources.redhat.com
> systemtap-owner
cc
> @sourceware.org
>
bcc
>
> 25/05/2006
Subject
> 00:33 Does anybody have a tapset to get
> the command line of a task?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> We already have pid(), tid() and execname() in tapset/context.stp. I'm
> wondering if somebody has written a tapset to get the command line of
> the (current) task as well. Looking at proc_pid_cmdline in
> fs/proc/base.c, I understand this information is in the user memory
> tracked from the mm struct of the task (instead of the task struct
> itself), so there is much more indirection to get it than pid, tid and
> execname.
>
> Thanks,
> Yi Feng
>
>
>