[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.20.13.1706300236230.18055@monopod.intra.ispras.ru>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 02:42:53 +0300 (MSK)
From: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@...ras.ru>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Allow annotating calloc for Valgrind
On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Rich Felker wrote:
> Use of valgrind annotation was already rejected a long time ago.
I don't see any record of that in the archives...
> The same can be done with a suppressions file and that's where it belongs.
What would you write in the suppression file? If you tell Valgrind to ignore
branch-on-uninit in calloc, it will report errors later on anyway when the
application reads from the calloc'ed region. Szabolcs went down that road once.
> The same could be achieved without hacks just using #if/#ifdef around
> the #include. But I don't see how <memcheck.h> could work anyway; musl
> obviously does not, and can't, use any host include paths where a
> header might already be installed.
With an appropriate -I in CPPFLAGS?
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
