|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...> - 2003-03-21 16:28:17
|
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: > Doesn't GCC use it's own inline-version of memcpy when optimization is on? Yes. Not much you can do; the user manual recommends turning off optimisation anyway ;) (Actually, I think it compromises on -O...) > An alternative solution for function wrapping would be not to use the runtime > linker (symbol overwriding, hack with __libc_malloc), but to change > instrumentation of the first BB of the given function, and do a "jmp" into > the valgrind wrapper version if the skin would like to use it. Hey, good idea. I'll have to think about that some more... > In my latest calltree version, I introduced an infrastruction to specify > instrumentation parameters on the basis of a function symbol name. > This would be a good addition to valgrind core, and would come handy > with the above wrapping (wrapper function as parameter dependent on symbol > name). > [...] > Does it make sense to merge this in some way with the error suppression stuff? What do you mean by "instrumentation parameters"? N |