https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=401454
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REPORTED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402369
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsew...@acm.org
--- Comment #8 from
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402369
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|callgrind |dhat
Assignee|josef.weidendor
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402369
--- Comment #6 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Nick Nethercote from comment #5)
> > It might be interesting to replace the wordFM by an xtree,
>
> It may. Nonetheless, I'd rather land the code as-is, because it's a major
> i
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402833
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402515
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Implement new option|Implement new option
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402515
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REPORTED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402515
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Implement new option|Implement new option
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402515
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #117081|0 |1
is obsolete
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402515
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Implement new option|Implement new option
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402515
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402515
Bug ID: 402515
Summary: Implement new option
--show-error-list-suppression-counts=no|yes / -s
Product: valgrind
Version: 3.14.0
Platform: Other
OS: Linux
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402395
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402369
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=401742
--- Comment #8 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Bernhard M. Wiedemann from comment #6)
> The patch only disables LTO for .a file creation where it does not make
> sense to have it.
Can you give more explanations about what yo
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392855
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392855
--- Comment #12 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Tom Hughes from comment #10)
> I don't believe we have ever attempted to suppress memory allocations done
> by the system libraries - you may have been lucky in not seeing any but I
&
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399301
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REPORTED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
Bug 399355 depends on bug 399301, which changed state.
Bug 399301 Summary: Use inlined frames in Massif XTree output.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399301
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399301
--- Comment #3 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Nick Nethercote from comment #2)
> Any reason not to land this? I think it's ready. It's a simple change and a
> clear improvement.
Sorry, I intended to take a look at it, but had no t
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
--- Comment #11 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
When building, I also see the below error:
./callgrind/Makefile.am:1: error: docs/callgrind_diff-manpage.xml is in
EXTRA_DIST but doesn't exist
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=287862
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
--- Comment #10 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #6)
> Brainstorm idea: if ever the callgrind format allows it, it would be nice
> to have a 'delta call' output also, i.e. have for each
> 'ca
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
--- Comment #9 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Created attachment 115775
--> https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=115775=edit
Second big callgrind file
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
--- Comment #8 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Created attachment 115774
--> https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=115774=edit
First big callgrind file
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
--- Comment #7 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #6)
> The alternative is to have callgrind_diff producing a file with twice more
> events
> than the compared files: for each event (e.g. instruct
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
--- Comment #6 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Nick Nethercote from comment #5)
> Created attachment 115743 [details]
> Updated version
>
> This fixes the problem that Philippe identified.
Thanks for the fix.
Here is some m
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=395416
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|REPORTED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396290
--- Comment #28 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to roger.light from comment #25)
> Created attachment 115712 [details]
> Patch that implements VG_(apply_ExeContext)().
2 comments:
* As ExeContext maintains internally its epoch
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399355
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399301
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398028
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REPORTED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398028
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Assertion `csfi_fits` |Assertion `cfsi_fits
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398028
--- Comment #11 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Created attachment 115250
--> https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=115250=edit
Change cfsi_fits checking to accept holes in rx mappings, with no cfsi refering
to holes
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398028
--- Comment #10 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
I was able to reproduce the crash with the provided library, thanks.
Here is the analysis of the crash:
After loading the cfi information, we check that the range
[cfsi_minavma, cfsi_maxavma] is fully
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398028
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Assertion `csfi_fits` |Assertion `csfi_fits
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #19 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #18)
> When a 'usage of undefined' bit is detected,
> it is not known anymore that this undefined
> value came from (or through) shared memory,
Whic
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #18 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #17)
> (In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #16)
> > That might not be straightforward to do, in particular if you have
> > multiple threads (yo
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #16 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #15)
> (In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #14)
> > So, IMO, the easiest is to use the client requests
>
> Which ones?
> I did all the
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #14 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #13)
> Will it help to print an additional warning when
> the uninitialized mem is copied to the shared region?
> The chances are very high this will result i
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #10 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #8)
> > Initialising yourself the memory via one ptr
> > but accessing it via another mapping
> > is not the same as declaring the memory
> > d
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=381819
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bot...@gmx.de
--- Comment #19 from
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398523
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #7 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #4)
> Created attachment 114906 [details]
> 2 processes and VALGRIND_MAKE_MEM_DEFINED
>
> (In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #3)
> > It
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #3 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #2)
> Created attachment 114889 [details]
> 2-process test-case
>
> Hi, thanks for your reply.
> Here is the test-case that does the same
> thing bu
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398028
--- Comment #5 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
I tried with the last julia release, both with the pre-built
and build from sources, problem does not reproduce.
(tried on an ubuntu 18.04)
We might maybe have an idea of what is happening if
you run vith
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392855
--- Comment #8 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to David Rankin from comment #7)
> Created attachment 114754 [details]
> xtmemory.kcg.16050
>
> Attached is the xtmemory.kcg.16050. The same problems continue in gcc (GCC)
> 8.2.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398028
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=395416
--- Comment #2 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Any news/feedback/additional data ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|CONFIRMED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393146
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|CONFIRMED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
--- Comment #17 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Commit 0822ebca8f964f1685d667e0c21fea926633bb92 should make the gdbserver
tests working with glibc 2.27
(at least it does on Ubuntu 18.04 which has a glibc 2.27)
Please confirm this also works on mips
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393146
--- Comment #12 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Johannes Jordan from comment #9)
> Created attachment 114650 [details]
> Minimal example that uses Qt QApplication
Thanks for the small reproducer. I obtained the same crash on my system.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393146
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Memcheck fails assert |Memcheck fails assert
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393146
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Memcheck fails assert |failing assert
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
--- Comment #16 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Dimitrije Nikolic from comment #11)
> I attached differences between output of test on MIPS and X86 architectures.
> (with glibc 2.27)
Can you rather attach the full unfiltered output o
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
--- Comment #15 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
I have looked at the patch v4_part2.
The patch filters more than just the 'use at exit'.
That means that e.g. we do not check anymore (or check less)
the incremental leak values/behaviour.
So, I have pushed
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
--- Comment #14 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Thanks for this work. I will look at all that in the coming days
(probably this week-end).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393146
--- Comment #8 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Johannes Jordan from comment #7)
> Anything I can do to help fix this problem?
I think a small compilable reproducer would help.
(I however cannot help much, I do not have a MACOS sys
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
--- Comment #8 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Dimitrije Nikolic from comment #5)
Finally replying, after some holidays ;).
> Created attachment 114443 [details]
> glibc2-27 & gdbserver problem v3
>
> I was trying for a f
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
--- Comment #4 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Sorry, it looks like I was not very clear in my comment :
I see you have kept the 'START_DELETE/END_DELETE' technique,
which you have integrated in filter_gdb.
I was more thinking to 'canonicalise' the select
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397424
--- Comment #2 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
filter_gdb already contains some sed expressions to canononicalise
select syscalls e.g.
...
-e 's/in select ()$/in syscall .../'
\
-e 's
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392118
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393146
--- Comment #3 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Julian Seward from comment #2)
> I just hit this on x86_64 Linux, so maybe it's not OSX specific.
Groinch :(.
I guess you have no systematic reproducer ?
Do you still have the host stacktr
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392118
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396290
--- Comment #17 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Roger Light from comment #15)
> Thanks for the comments and review.
>
> I think adding greater capability for controlling where and when failures
> occur, and adding syscall suppor
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396290
--- Comment #12 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
((In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #11)
> Yes, I agree that having a way to exercise the error recovery/handling
> patch of an application is a very good thing to do.
Remove
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396290
--- Comment #11 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
Yes, I agree that having a way to exercise the error recovery/handling
patch of an application is a very good thing to do.
IMO, it is very late now to add this, even as an exp tool.
A.o. we better discuss
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396290
--- Comment #9 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
I am wondering also how much difficult it would be to somewhat more
generalise the tool.
For example, we might want to make similar tests to check failing syscalls.
A part of the tool can then be re-used
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396290
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=395416
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=372347
--- Comment #18 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(In reply to Paul Floyd from comment #17)
> Great. I also have a small test case for this, but it uses a Makefile rather
> than the Valgrind perl mechanism. I'll look into adapting it to the Va
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=394731
--- Comment #2 from Philippe Waroquiers ---
(when testing on a amd64 cpu machine, it does not need this patch)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=394731
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philippe.waroquiers@skynet
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=372347
Philippe Waroquiers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=394227
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=394036
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392855
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393023
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RE
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=393099
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RE
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392449
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392331
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392373
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
--- Comment #29 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
Created attachment 111644
--> https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=111644=edit
tentative patch to support llvm+lto
With the attached patch, llvm+lto works till
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
--- Comment #28 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
(In reply to Philippe Waroquiers from comment #27)
> So, when I have a little bit of time, I will install llvm
> and see if I can make that work.
At least on
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
--- Comment #27 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
(In reply to Дилян Палаузов from comment #26)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84934#c1 suggests that
> distributions are supposed to install th
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392180
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391861
--- Comment #4 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
fixed (or rather bypassed) in commit 4c9bd311660bf4c1f9228519223214b6a50935ec
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391861
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RE
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391861
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Massif assertion failed |
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
--- Comment #25 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
(In reply to Дилян Палаузов from comment #23)
> I just verified, that LLVM does not install gcc-ar and gcc-ranlib, but
> llvm-ar and llvm-ranlib .
>
> S
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|---
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391861
--- Comment #3 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
The failure happens at the very first allocation.
The guest andhist stacktraces of the crash contain only one single function:
host stacktrace:
==2203==at 0x58
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RE
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391861
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
--- Comment #18 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> ---
(In reply to Дилян Палаузов from comment #16)
> People either want to compile everything with LTO, or nothing with LTO, or
> they don't know about LTO.
Humph, tha
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=338252
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #88247|0
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389373
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroqui...@skynet.be> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RE
101 - 200 of 433 matches
Mail list logo
