[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <482628C7.2020700@goop.org>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 23:59:19 +0100
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>,
John Reiser <jreiser@...Wagon.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
Josh Aune <luken@...er.org>, Pekka Paalanen <pq@....fi>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] kmemcheck v7
Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Yeah, as soon as the stack pointer changes, everything below it is
>> invalidated (except if the stack-pointer change was actually determined
>> to be a stack switch).
>>
>
> It might in theory, but at least it doesn't for my test program.
>
If you'd read a tiny bit further down my mail, you'd have seen my
explanation of why your test program isn't testing what you think it is,
and a variant which does.
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