lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS-feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL)
/
SubjectRe: Valgrind meets UML
FromJeremy Fitzhardinge <>
Date20 Dec 2002 23:32:21 -0800
Digg This
On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 18:49, Jeff Dike wrote:
jreiser@BitWagon.com said:
I suggest that useful partial progress can be made sooner by identifying the allocators, telling valgrind about them and their external semantics, and having valgrind trust them.

This is likely what will happen anyway. It will likely generate noise from inside the allocators until they are described.

It probably won't be the allocators which generate warnings. The main problem will be that newly allocated memory will still be considered initialized by its previous owner. Also, if UML allocates memory using mmap, all memory will be considered to be initialized.
Waiting for the globally correct description can take a long time, perhaps about as long as waiting for the authors of device drivers to update to a new device I/O model.

Nonsense. They aren't going to be that complicated, and they don't change very often anyway.

Doing a few base-level allocators first (get_free_page, kmalloc) will find lots of problems, then you can start refining to the more specialized allocators.

J

\
ISP Services
Valid XHTML 1.0!\ /
Valid CSS! Last update: 2005-03-22 12:31    [W:0.174 / U:1.110 seconds]
©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans