[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <468E834E.6020906@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 11:00:46 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>
CC: Dan Kegel <dank@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Robert Walsh <rjwalsh@...ables.org>
Subject: Re: 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.)
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists