|
From:
<edg...@in...> - 2005-07-18 14:50:21
|
hi Nicholas, I got it from gstreamer project version 0.9=20 (http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/) I really think it has been output with --gen-suppressions=3Dyes. I already have similar problems with a Addr4 error reported by valgrind. May be this problem is related to a valgrind bug, like someone suggested = in http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=3D11203153 thanks Edgard Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Edgard Nic=E9as Arcoverde Gusm=E3o Lima wrote: > >> ### glib suppressions >> >> { >> <g_type_init> >> Memcheck:Leak >> fun:calloc >> fun:g_malloc0 >> obj:/usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.* >> obj:/usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.* >> fun:g_type_init_with_debug_flags >> fun:g_type_init >> fun:init_pre >> fun:init_popt_callback >> obj:/usr/lib/libpopt.so.* >> obj:/usr/lib/libpopt.so.* >> fun:poptGetContext >> fun:gst_init_check_with_popt_table >> } >> >> BUT messages like the following one are still be showed: >> >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D 1080 bytes in 27 blocks are possibly lost in loss re= cord 9=20 >> of 13 >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D at 0x1B904F81: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:175) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BBF4B45: g_malloc0 (in=20 >> /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.600.3) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BB92491: (within /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so= .0.600.3) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BB92789: (within /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so= .0.600.3) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BB995DF: g_type_init_with_debug_flags (in=20 >> /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.3) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BB996DE: g_type_init (in=20 >> /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.3) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1B91F028: init_pre (gst.c:459) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1B91FA54: init_popt_callback (gst.c:737) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BC4A631: (within /lib/libpopt.so.0.0.0) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BC4A63F: (within /lib/libpopt.so.0.0.0) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1BC4A9B5: poptGetContext (in /lib/libpopt.so= .0.0.0) >> =3D=3D12598=3D=3D by 0x1B91EC39: gst_init_check_with_popt_table (gs= t.c:353) > > > It looks ok, maybe there's a small mistake in it. Have you tried=20 > --gen-suppressions=3Dyes to generate the suppression? How does its=20 > output compare to your suppression? > > N |