On Dec 21, 2007 10:04 AM, Tom Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Surely if it was changed before VG_TRACK(start_client_code)() then it
> would have been fine for it to cache it?
>
> Did you mean that it was changed after that tracking call but before
> the code in the handler was executed?

What happens is the following:
* Core changes VG_(running_tid).
* Core notifies tool about client memory accesses.
* Core calls VG_TRACK(start_client_code)().

This is why it is not sufficient to cache VG_(running_tid) upon
VG_TRACK(start_client_code)() notifications.

Regards,

Bart Van Assche.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Valgrind-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers

Reply via email to