|
From: Dennis L. <pla...@in...> - 2005-07-19 22:54:54
|
At 20:37 19.07.2005, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: >On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, Dennis Lubert wrote: > >This is good to know... very few others have said things like this which >is why Helgrind has always been a lower priority thing. Generally, >feedback indicates to us that people really hate false positives, and >Helgrind's high number of them is a big problem for most people. Yeah, false positives are always nasty. The problem with multithreading is that locking there is a really complex field, and more complex is effective programming where no locking is needed sometimes because of program flow prevents concurrent access. On the one hand I doubt that there will be ever an effective algorithm that will eliminate all those false positives. On the other hand I dont think that it will be necessary, since people who write multithreaded programs should be able to identify false positives. One thing that comes to my mind here is some kind of online-auto-suppression. In the current suppression mechanism, you ask for generating suppression, copy/paste it into some suppression file, and use this at the command line to re-run the program. Better would be some mechanism, where the currently generated suppresion can be chosen to be suppressed for the further program run, and automagically entered into some program-specific suppression file. So "disabling" the false positives would be rather fast and filtering the real bad situations should be faster and more straightforward... >Maybe a brief description of each one in the usage question would be useful. Yeah, great idea... of every installed tool if this is possible, so additionally installed tools can advertise themselves too... Carpe quod tibi datum est |