Re: [Valgrind-users] Re: [uml-devel] Re: UML and valgrind

[Jeff D. <jd...@ad...>]

th...@cy... said:
> Even doing that (if it's still possible) is quite dangerous as that
> thread could accidentally damage valgrind's environment. 

So?  It's also quite dangerous as that thread could damage another thread's
environment.  That's the nature of multithreaded apps.

> That would imply that the newly created thread was left to run on the
> real CPU rather than the simulated CPU. If that's the case then I'm
> not that it is possible anymore - I know we had to take out the stuff
> that allowed valgrind to switch back to the real CPU after running a
> specified number of basic blocks because it could no longer be made to
> work. 

We're not talking about a thread switching back and forth between the real
CPU and the simulated one.  We're talking about a thread being created on
the real CPU and staying there.

				Jeff