valgrind suppressions for 64 bit machines
I get a bunch in modeller too which I can add.
Index: tools/valgrind-python.supp =================================================================== --- tools/valgrind-python.supp (revision 584) +++ tools/valgrind-python.supp (working copy) @@ -13,6 +13,18 @@ }
{ + ADDRESS_IN_RANGE/Invalid read of size 8 + Memcheck:Addr8 + fun:PyObject_Free +} + +{ + ADDRESS_IN_RANGE/Invalid read of size 8 + Memcheck:Value8 + fun:PyObject_Free +} + +{ ADDRESS_IN_RANGE/Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value Memcheck:Cond fun:PyObject_Free @@ -31,6 +43,18 @@ }
{ + ADDRESS_IN_RANGE/Invalid read of size 8 + Memcheck:Addr8 + fun:PyObject_Realloc +} + +{ + ADDRESS_IN_RANGE/Invalid read of size 8 + Memcheck:Value8 + fun:PyObject_Realloc +} + +{ ADDRESS_IN_RANGE/Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value Memcheck:Cond fun:PyObject_Realloc
Daniel Russel wrote: > I get a bunch in modeller too which I can add.
Sure thing, if you like. Last time I checked these were all in the Intel Fortran runtime though - not Modeller's fault. ;)
Ben
On May 29, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Ben Webb wrote:
> Daniel Russel wrote: >> I get a bunch in modeller too which I can add. > > Sure thing, if you like. Last time I checked these were all in the > Intel Fortran runtime though - not Modeller's fault. ;) You know better than I :-)
Daniel Russel wrote: > On May 29, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Ben Webb wrote: >> Daniel Russel wrote: >>> I get a bunch in modeller too which I can add. >> Sure thing, if you like. Last time I checked these were all in the >> Intel Fortran runtime though - not Modeller's fault. ;) > You know better than I :-)
Can you point me to an example (and executable type) which triggers these please? I don't see either with a simple testcase on x86_64 with ifort, and I'd like to see where they're actually coming from so I can document them properly - particularly as the first looks like it could be a Modeller bug.
Of course, since these are Modeller suppressions, they'll go into Modeller SVN rather than IMP.
Ben
I just run all the test cases through with valgrind (~ "imppy.sh valgrind python run-all-testcases.py" with appropriate ..s and corrections to names) and got a bunch of those two.
On May 30, 2008, at 6:08 PM, Ben Webb wrote:
> Daniel Russel wrote: >> On May 29, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Ben Webb wrote: >>> Daniel Russel wrote: >>>> I get a bunch in modeller too which I can add. >>> Sure thing, if you like. Last time I checked these were all in the >>> Intel Fortran runtime though - not Modeller's fault. ;) >> You know better than I :-) > > Can you point me to an example (and executable type) which triggers > these please? I don't see either with a simple testcase on x86_64 with > ifort, and I'd like to see where they're actually coming from so I can > document them properly - particularly as the first looks like it could > be a Modeller bug. > > Of course, since these are Modeller suppressions, they'll go into > Modeller SVN rather than IMP. > > Ben > -- > ben@salilab.org http://salilab.org/~ben/ > "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data." > - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > _______________________________________________ > IMP-dev mailing list > IMP-dev@salilab.org > https://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/imp-dev
Daniel Russel wrote: > I just run all the test cases through with valgrind (~ "imppy.sh > valgrind python run-all-testcases.py" with appropriate ..s and > corrections to names) and got a bunch of those two.
... OK... but on what machine type? x86_64?
Ben
On May 30, 2008, at 6:54 PM, Ben Webb wrote:
> Daniel Russel wrote: >> I just run all the test cases through with valgrind (~ "imppy.sh >> valgrind python run-all-testcases.py" with appropriate ..s and >> corrections to names) and got a bunch of those two. > > ... OK... but on what machine type? x86_64? Yup. Flute.
participants (3)
-
Ben Webb -
Daniel Russel -
Daniel Russel