Zachary Turner <divisortheory@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Well at least I know I'm not going crazy and that it happens > everywhere apparently. Although I'm not sure if that's comforting or > demoralizing since it means my program's erratic behavior may not > necessarily be related to the linking issue. I guess the appropriate > place to raise the issue about all the brk errors would be the > valgrind list. What about errors such as this? > > ==5645== 1 errors in context 43 of 69: > ==5645== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) > ==5645== at 0x80D227C: strlen (in /home/zach/test) > ==5645== by 0x8105DD4: _dl_init_paths (in /home/zach/test) > ==5645== by 0x80E389B: _dl_non_dynamic_init (in /home/zach/test) > ==5645== by 0x80E4245: __libc_init_first (in /home/zach/test) > ==5645== by 0x80B3DDD: (below main) (in /home/zach/test) > ==5645== Uninitialised value was created by a stack allocation > ==5645== at 0x8105BEB: _dl_init_paths (in /home/zach/test) > > There's no mention of brk anywhere here, do you know if this case is > still safe anyway? At first glance this looks like a fairly standard valgrind issue. strlen picks up a word at a time. That is OK because it only does it on word-aligned addresses, and it looks for a null byte from the start of the loaded bytes. So although it is a read of uninitialized memory, it is not serious. I don't know for sure that that is what is happening here--I don't see this warning when I run. Ian
