|
From: Dan K. <da...@ke...> - 2004-01-16 02:14:33
|
Dominik Stadler wrote: > I don't think valgrind is responsible, but I thought I'd report it anyway, > maybe you can add sort of a "Known Issue" somewhere. > > When I try to run the valgrind-binaries stored in the Rational/IBM > ClearCase version control-system, valgrind does not work any more: > ... > ==24043== Warning: segment-override prefix encountered, but thread has no LDT > ==24043== Warning: segment access: virtual addr 0 exceeds segment limit of 0 > ==24043== Invalid read of size 4 > ==24043== at 0x40249EF4: __pthread_alt_lock (spinlock.c:446) > ==24043== by 0x40246D25: __pthread_mutex_lock (mutex.c:120) > ==24043== by 0x403AE6D0: __register_frame_info (in /usr/lib/libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so) > ==24043== by 0x40021A61: (within /.automount/dcaclust2/root/dcaclearcase/VOBS/eParty.vbs/c/cdft/11/41/ee7ef167450311d89c82000180e4a89e) > ==24043== by 0x400217D0: (within /.automount/dcaclust2/root/dcaclearcase/VOBS/eParty.vbs/c/cdft/11/41/ee7ef167450311d89c82000180e4a89e) > ==24043== by 0x4000DAA6: _dl_init (dl-init.c:70) > ==24043== by 0x40001ED0: (within /lib/ld-2.2.4.so) > ==24043== Address 0x0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or free'd > ... > when the binaries are not stored in ClearCase, valgrind works perfectly. ClearCase is extremely intrusive. You have just run into a case where ClearCase's strange architecture has bitten you. Because it is closed source, there's not a lot the valgrind team can do about it. Feel free to report this as a bug to ClearCase. And please consider using a less insane version control system, e.g. perforce or bitkeeper. - Dan |