Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Smith <psmith@gnu.org>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Tools to classify / uniquify core dumps or stack traces?
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 01:13:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1375406012.3028.38.camel@homebase> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130801193547.GA12116@host2.jankratochvil.net>

On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 21:35 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 21:26:21 +0200, Paul Smith wrote:
> > Hi all.  I've got an environment where I'm getting lots of core dumps
> > from various places and it's very tedious to go through them and
> > determine which ones are for unique problems, and which are essentially
> > duplicates (same bug causing the core dump).
> > 
> > I was thinking of throwing together some kind of Perl or Python script
> > that could compare and categorize stack traces, but I thought surely
> > someone must have done something like this before.
> > 
> > Anyone have any pointers or thoughts about something like this?
> 
> ABRT, it has several backends how to report the results (the typical one is
> Bugzilla), it also supports heuristic duplicates detection etc.
> It is shipped in all recent Fedora releases by default and it is also
> a project deployable on any OS:
> 	https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/
> 
> There is also Apport (I do not have experience with it).

I don't need to collect the cores (at least not yet), they are being
obtained through other methods (which I don't have a lot of control
over, currently) and I have bunches of them sitting in a directory.
Along with them I have the binary they were generated from, a source
tree it was built from, and a sysroot containing the runtime libraries
it was invoked with.  I can easily script up something to generate GDB
stack traces from them.  I just need something to reduce/classify them.

It looks like btparser is close to what I need.  It's an unusual choice,
IMHO, to use C to implement something which so fundamentally depends on
text manipulation; I would have chosen Perl or Python myself.  But I'll
definitely take a look.

I notice that "satyr" is said to be "the next generation btparser", but
from my very brief overview it appears to be more tightly bound up with
abrt and the way that abrt packages things, and I'm not using abrt.


Thanks for the pointer!


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-08-02  1:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-01 19:26 Paul Smith
2013-08-01 19:36 ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-08-01 23:05   ` Aurelian Melinte
2013-08-02  1:13   ` Paul Smith [this message]
2013-08-02  8:59     ` Phil Muldoon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1375406012.3028.38.camel@homebase \
    --to=psmith@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox