|
From: Bart V. A. <bar...@gm...> - 2007-12-21 15:35:46
|
On Dec 21, 2007 10:04 AM, Tom Hughes <to...@co...> wrote: > > Surely if it was changed before VG_TRACK(start_client_code)() then it > would have been fine for it to cache it? > > Did you mean that it was changed after that tracking call but before > the code in the handler was executed? What happens is the following: * Core changes VG_(running_tid). * Core notifies tool about client memory accesses. * Core calls VG_TRACK(start_client_code)(). This is why it is not sufficient to cache VG_(running_tid) upon VG_TRACK(start_client_code)() notifications. Regards, Bart Van Assche. |