[#3358] Fwd: fastcgi & continuations (Re: Idea: Webshare) — Patrick May <patrick@...>
Hello,
8 messages
2004/09/09
[#3359] Re: Fwd: fastcgi & continuations (Re: Idea: Webshare)
— Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
2004/09/09
Patrick May (patrick@hexane.org) wrote:
[#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:
[#3430] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:30, ts wrote:
[#3431] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— ts <decoux@...>
2004/09/17
>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:
[#3432] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:50, ts wrote:
[#3433] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
There is a minor flaw in my analysis toward the end; ignore previous email
[#3434] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:50, ts wrote:
[#3437] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2004/09/17
Hi,
Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
From:
Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
Date:
2004-09-17 11:34:28 UTC
List:
ruby-core #3423
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 12:01, ts wrote:
>
> '.local i' : the address will be allocated in bss section, and it will
> zeroed at run-time.
>
Ok; I concur. Infact running the 'fixed' code through Valgrind does not remove
the errors.
The function causing valgrind to shout
==28001== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==28001== at 0x806FF18: is_pointer_to_heap (gc.c:591)
==28001== by 0x806FEE1: mark_locations_array (gc.c:609)
==28001== by 0x80710F8: rb_gc (gc.c:1328)
==28001== by 0x806FBAC: rb_newobj (gc.c:376)
is
static inline int
is_pointer_to_heap(ptr)
void *ptr;
{
register RVALUE *p = RANY(ptr);
register RVALUE *heap_org;
register long i;
if (p < lomem || p > himem) return Qfalse;
/* check if p looks like a pointer */
for (i=0; i < heaps_used; i++) {
heap_org = heaps[i].slot;
if (heap_org <= p && p < heap_org + heaps[i].limit &&
((((char*)p)-((char*)heap_org))%sizeof(RVALUE)) == 0)
return Qtrue;
}
return Qfalse;
}
So if lomem and himem are not the culprits, then it must be 'p'
I'll try following this back up the stack with gdb, to see where it leads...
Andrew