[lttng-dev] RFC: More flexible support for UST event collection in containers
Loïc Gelle
loic.gelle at polymtl.ca
Mon Aug 27 11:26:36 EDT 2018
Hi all,
Any reactions to my previous message?
Thanks,
Loïc.
Loïc Gelle <loic.gelle at polymtl.ca> a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> I am writing a proof of concept for LTTng (ust + tools) for better
> support of application tracing in containers. My point is that we
> should be able to collect all UST events emitted from within
> containers using a single sessiond / consumerd, at least if you want
> to. The main problem to that approach was that the session deamon
> was unable to handle PID clashes when two apps with the same vpid
> tried to register. I fix this by patching the UST client for it to
> declare both its PID and its PID namespace inode number during
> registration (and I also propagated the change to lttng-tools for
> app registration in the hashtable). My patched versions of tools and
> UST are here, in the branch "containers":
>
> https://github.com/loicgelle/lttng-ust
> https://github.com/loicgelle/lttng-tools
>
> One problem that I have now is that LTTng-tools currently uses
> /proc/[pid]/cmdline to fetch the name of each application when
> listing the available tracepoints. This is a problem since we have
> no (simple) way to know the PID of the registered apps in the
> context of the PID namespace of sessiond, so this step basically
> fails. I thought that a fix for this would be to ask the
> applications themselves to declare their name using their dedicated
> socket. Do you think that would be possible and relevant?
>
> Also, if you like the idea that I'm pushing, there is more work
> ahead to make it a feature (for example propagating the changes to
> pid tracking).
>
> Thanks,
> Loïc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> lttng-dev mailing list
> lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
> https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
More information about the lttng-dev
mailing list