Re: [Valgrind-users] FW: Helgrind to-do list

[David F. <fa...@kd...>]

On Wednesday 25 September 2013 18:24:59 Phil Longstaff wrote:
> *         Don't update the lock-order graph, and don't check for errors,
> when a "try"-style lock operation happens (e.g. pthread_mutex_trylock).
> Such calls do not add any real restrictions to the locking order, since
> they can always fail to acquire the lock, resulting in the caller going off
> and doing Plan B (presumably it will have a Plan B). Doing such checks
> could generate false lock-order errors and confuse users.

Assuming this one is what you numbered #4 (i.e. that you started to count at 1 
and not 0) :-), then it's something I had started a long time ago, details are 
in the archive for this mailing-list (Nov 2012) (actually let me attached the 
mails here for convenience), and the testcase is at 
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=243232

I would be very very glad if you could take over, I lack time and valgrind 
knowledge.

I'm also attaching my very preliminary & very old patch for it. IIRC it needs 
to be updated to actually implement what was discussed in the attached emails,
in addition to making it work in  the first place...

-- 
David Faure, fa...@kd..., http://www.davidfaure.fr
Working on KDE, in particular KDE Frameworks 5