[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Valgrinding the kernel?
Jeff Dike wrote:
> Don't think so. With what I get on FC5 (valgrind-3.1.0), I get this:
> ==31913== Jump to the invalid address stated on the next line
> ==31913== at 0x9: ???
> ==31913== by 0xBEC1599A: ???
> ==31913== by 0x696C2F69: ???
> ==31913== Address 0x9 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
> ==31913==
> ==31913== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV): dumping core
> UML is cloning a thread in order to test the host's ptrace. However,
> it looks like valgrind is branching to 0x9 for some reason.

How far into the run does this happen? Immediately, or after a while?

> This particular bit is going to be problematic for other reasons, but
> if valgrind ever looks like it has a chance of working, I can work
> around that in UML.

Hm. I haven't touched Valgrind in a couple of years, and I suspect
people haven't been as mean to it as I was being. It might be time I
gave it some love. (I've also been thinking about porting it to be a
Xen guest so that we can Valgrind whole virtual machines - but that's a
different story.)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-06 20:03    [W:0.057 / U:3.384 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site