Hi Lianbo, Hatayama-san, -----Original Message----- > Hi, HATAYAMA > > 在 2021年01月21日 12:47, crash-utility-request@xxxxxxxxxx 写道: > > From: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 14:28 > > To: crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: Hatayama, Daisuke/?? ?? > > Subject: [PATCH v1 0/3] Add valgrind support for the crash's custom memory > > > > This patch set adds valgrind support for the crash's custom memory > > allocator. The motivation comes from investigation at > > https://github.com/crash-utility/crash-extensions/issues/1. > > > > The 1st patch implements the valgrind support, while 2nd and 3rd fixes > > the actual issues on the crash's custom memory allocator detected by > > valgrind. > > > > HATAYAMA Daisuke (3): > > Add valgrind support for the crash's custom memory allocator > > symbols: Fix potential read to already freed object > > tools: Fix potential write to object of 0 size > > > > Thank you for the patchset. > > This changes are fine to me, but I have some other concerns as below: > > [1] add a simple description for supporting 'make valgrind' in README? Good catch, thanks Lianbo. FYI, note that the README data is also in help.c and needs to be updated. > > [2] only pass the '-DVALGRIND' when using 'make valgrind' explicitly? > > For example: > > Step1: [root@dell-pet620-01 crash]# make valgrind > TARGET: X86_64 > CRASH: 7.2.9++ > GDB: 7.6 > > cc -c -g -DX86_64 -DVALGRIND -DGDB_7_6 build_data.c -Wall -O2 -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes > -fstack-protector -Wformat-security > cc -c -g -DX86_64 -DVALGRIND -DGDB_7_6 tools.c -Wall -O2 -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes > -fstack-protector -Wformat-security > cc -c -g -DX86_64 -DVALGRIND -DGDB_7_6 global_data.c -Wall -O2 -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes > -fstack-protector -Wformat-security > ^^^^^^^^^ > ... > > Step2: [root@dell-pet620-01 crash]# make lzo > TARGET: X86_64 > CRASH: 7.2.9++ > GDB: 7.6 > > cc -c -g -DX86_64 -DVALGRIND -DLZO -DGDB_7_6 build_data.c -Wall -O2 -Wstrict-prototypes > -Wmissing-prototypes -fstack-protector -Wformat-security > cc -c -g -DX86_64 -DVALGRIND -DLZO -DGDB_7_6 main.c -Wall -O2 -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes > -fstack-protector -Wformat-security > cc -c -g -DX86_64 -DVALGRIND -DLZO -DGDB_7_6 tools.c -Wall -O2 -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes > -fstack-protector -Wformat-security > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ... > > For the 'make lzo', the cflag '-DVALGRIND' is also added here after the step1, is that expected? As written in the README, these targets are sticky, so it's expected: All of the alternate build commands above are "sticky" in that the special "make" targets only have to be entered one time; all subsequent builds will follow suit. AFAIK, the only command that can drop a target is "make nowarn", otherwise we can drop "lzo" and so on by removing CFLAGS.extra and LDFLAGS.extra for the present. Thanks, Kazu > > > BTW: this change could make the distribution add a new dependency of valgrind-devel package(A warm reminder). > > Thanks. > Lianbo > > > Makefile | 4 ++++ > > configure.c | 15 ++++++++++++- > > symbols.c | 10 +++------ > > tools.c | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > 4 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 1.8.3.1 > > -- > Crash-utility mailing list > Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
