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

[Crispin F. <cr...@th...>]

On Wed, 2003-05-14 at 13:49, Richard Boulton wrote:
> Wouldn't that result in confusing, or at least excessively repetitive,
> output when the same leak is happening multiple times when called from
> different places?

Hmm I hadn't thought of that :)

> How about changing the leak checker to compare the names up to the first
> name in the stack trace that isn't in part of valgrind?  This would
> exclude the allocation functions quite neatly, which seems desirable.
> Perhaps there are problems with this that I can't see, though.

That seems like a pretty good solution, the slight problem however is
that things such as strdup() aren't provided by valgrind, but will cause
a malloc() to be performed, but the actual location of the leak is in
the function above. (there may only be a small number of functions like
that and these could possibly be special cased to go up another level).

Crispin