[#3419] Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>

Hello list,

19 messages 2004/09/17
[#3422] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

[#3423] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...> 2004/09/17

On Friday 17 Sep 2004 12:01, ts wrote:

[#3424] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

[#3425] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...> 2004/09/17

On Friday 17 Sep 2004 12:37, ts wrote:

[#3426] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

[#3428] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...> 2004/09/17

On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:05, ts wrote:

[#3429] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

Re: [PATCH] dir.c --- Dir.chdir error handling

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2004-09-15 09:37:28 UTC
List: ruby-core #3404
Hi,

In message "Re: [PATCH] dir.c --- Dir.chdir error handling"
    on Wed, 15 Sep 2004 18:26:05 +0900, ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> writes:

| Now if ruby crash, rewrite mark_locations_array() like this
|
| ------------------------------------------------------------
|   static void
|   mark_locations_array(x, n)
|       register VALUE *x;
|       register long n;
|   {
|       VALUE tmp;
|
|       while (n--) {
|        if (is_pointer_to_heap((void *)*x)) {
|            tmp = *x;
|            rb_gc_mark(tmp);
|        }
|        x++;
|       }
|   }
| ------------------------------------------------------------
|
| and you'll see that ruby work (normally)
|
| If you look at the patch to correct this problem, written by matz, you'll
| see that it has nothing to do with `volatile'

Interesting.  I'm happy to see the bug fixed.  But I'm not sure what
was the problem, and how this "fix" changed the situation.  Can you
(or anybody) explain for me?

							matz.

In This Thread