Re: [Valgrind-users] Seemingly wrong reachable-memory reporting

[Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...>]

On 14 May 2003, Crispin Flowerday wrote:

> While attempting to locate all the memory in a program that wasn't
> freed, I came across an odd behaviour.
>
> Using the following program:
>
> == START ==
>
> static char * bar = 0;
> static char * bar1 = 0;
>
> void do_stuff1()
> {
>    bar = new char[1024];
> }
>
> void do_stuff()
> {
>    bar1 = new char[1024];
> }
>
> int main( int argc, char ** argv )
> {
>    do_stuff();
>    do_stuff1();
> }
>
> == END ==
>
> (compiled with gcc 3.2.3 (debian unstable), using 'g++ main.cpp-o main'
>
> I get only 2 unreachable blocks, but both with the same stacktrace:
>
> 2048 bytes in 2 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
>    at 0x4015D573: __builtin_vec_new (vg_clientfuncs.c:161)
>    by 0x4015D5AE: operator new[](unsigned) (vg_clientfuncs.c:174)
>    by 0x8048450: do_stuff() (in /home/crispin/src/tmp/main)
>    by 0x8048470: main (in /home/crispin/src/tmp/main)
>
> Surely I should get 2 different stacktraces?

I get the same with gcc 3.2.3.  But with gcc 2.96 I get two stack traces.
Hmm, not sure...

N