You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(122) |
Nov
(152) |
Dec
(69) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(25) |
Mar
(73) |
Apr
(82) |
May
(24) |
Jun
(25) |
Jul
(10) |
Aug
(11) |
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(54) |
Nov
(203) |
Dec
(182) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(307) |
Feb
(305) |
Mar
(430) |
Apr
(312) |
May
(187) |
Jun
(342) |
Jul
(487) |
Aug
(637) |
Sep
(336) |
Oct
(373) |
Nov
(441) |
Dec
(210) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(385) |
Feb
(480) |
Mar
(636) |
Apr
(544) |
May
(679) |
Jun
(625) |
Jul
(810) |
Aug
(838) |
Sep
(634) |
Oct
(521) |
Nov
(965) |
Dec
(543) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(494) |
Feb
(431) |
Mar
(546) |
Apr
(411) |
May
(406) |
Jun
(322) |
Jul
(256) |
Aug
(401) |
Sep
(345) |
Oct
(542) |
Nov
(308) |
Dec
(481) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(427) |
Feb
(326) |
Mar
(367) |
Apr
(255) |
May
(244) |
Jun
(204) |
Jul
(223) |
Aug
(231) |
Sep
(354) |
Oct
(374) |
Nov
(497) |
Dec
(362) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(322) |
Feb
(482) |
Mar
(658) |
Apr
(422) |
May
(476) |
Jun
(396) |
Jul
(455) |
Aug
(267) |
Sep
(280) |
Oct
(253) |
Nov
(232) |
Dec
(304) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(486) |
Feb
(470) |
Mar
(458) |
Apr
(423) |
May
(696) |
Jun
(461) |
Jul
(551) |
Aug
(575) |
Sep
(134) |
Oct
(110) |
Nov
(157) |
Dec
(102) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(226) |
Feb
(86) |
Mar
(147) |
Apr
(117) |
May
(107) |
Jun
(203) |
Jul
(193) |
Aug
(238) |
Sep
(300) |
Oct
(246) |
Nov
(23) |
Dec
(75) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(133) |
Feb
(195) |
Mar
(315) |
Apr
(200) |
May
(267) |
Jun
(293) |
Jul
(353) |
Aug
(237) |
Sep
(278) |
Oct
(611) |
Nov
(274) |
Dec
(260) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(303) |
Feb
(391) |
Mar
(417) |
Apr
(441) |
May
(488) |
Jun
(655) |
Jul
(590) |
Aug
(610) |
Sep
(526) |
Oct
(478) |
Nov
(359) |
Dec
(372) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(467) |
Feb
(226) |
Mar
(391) |
Apr
(281) |
May
(299) |
Jun
(252) |
Jul
(311) |
Aug
(352) |
Sep
(481) |
Oct
(571) |
Nov
(222) |
Dec
(231) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(185) |
Feb
(329) |
Mar
(245) |
Apr
(238) |
May
(281) |
Jun
(399) |
Jul
(382) |
Aug
(500) |
Sep
(579) |
Oct
(435) |
Nov
(487) |
Dec
(256) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(338) |
Feb
(357) |
Mar
(330) |
Apr
(294) |
May
(191) |
Jun
(108) |
Jul
(142) |
Aug
(261) |
Sep
(190) |
Oct
(54) |
Nov
(83) |
Dec
(22) |
| 2016 |
Jan
(49) |
Feb
(89) |
Mar
(33) |
Apr
(50) |
May
(27) |
Jun
(34) |
Jul
(53) |
Aug
(53) |
Sep
(98) |
Oct
(206) |
Nov
(93) |
Dec
(53) |
| 2017 |
Jan
(65) |
Feb
(82) |
Mar
(102) |
Apr
(86) |
May
(187) |
Jun
(67) |
Jul
(23) |
Aug
(93) |
Sep
(65) |
Oct
(45) |
Nov
(35) |
Dec
(17) |
| 2018 |
Jan
(26) |
Feb
(35) |
Mar
(38) |
Apr
(32) |
May
(8) |
Jun
(43) |
Jul
(27) |
Aug
(30) |
Sep
(43) |
Oct
(42) |
Nov
(38) |
Dec
(67) |
| 2019 |
Jan
(32) |
Feb
(37) |
Mar
(53) |
Apr
(64) |
May
(49) |
Jun
(18) |
Jul
(14) |
Aug
(53) |
Sep
(25) |
Oct
(30) |
Nov
(49) |
Dec
(31) |
| 2020 |
Jan
(87) |
Feb
(45) |
Mar
(37) |
Apr
(51) |
May
(99) |
Jun
(36) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(14) |
Sep
(20) |
Oct
(24) |
Nov
(40) |
Dec
(23) |
| 2021 |
Jan
(14) |
Feb
(53) |
Mar
(85) |
Apr
(15) |
May
(19) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(14) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(57) |
Oct
(73) |
Nov
(56) |
Dec
(22) |
| 2022 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(22) |
Mar
(6) |
Apr
(55) |
May
(46) |
Jun
(39) |
Jul
(15) |
Aug
(9) |
Sep
(11) |
Oct
(34) |
Nov
(20) |
Dec
(36) |
| 2023 |
Jan
(79) |
Feb
(41) |
Mar
(99) |
Apr
(169) |
May
(48) |
Jun
(16) |
Jul
(16) |
Aug
(57) |
Sep
(19) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
2
(1) |
3
(1) |
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
9
|
10
(1) |
11
(1) |
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
(1) |
|
16
(1) |
17
(1) |
18
|
19
|
20
(2) |
21
(1) |
22
|
|
23
(4) |
24
(1) |
25
(7) |
26
(3) |
27
|
28
|
|
|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...> - 2003-02-21 10:32:19
|
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Julian Seward wrote:
> Sounds pretty harmless to me ... commit, I say.
Turns out I need a similar event for when the signal frame is popped. I
added:
void (*post_deliver_signal) ( ThreadId tid, Int sigNo );
which is called at the very end of vg_pop_signal_frame(). No 'alt_stack'
parameter this time, basically because it's not easily available. Any
skin that really needs to know it can cache the value from
pre_deliver_signal().
Interestingly, it seems that not only %esp but also %eax and %edx can be
trashed when a signal returns, although I couldn't find the code that
caused this.
I realised that for my skin's purposes, these new events weren't necessary
because the events new_mem_stack_signal() and die_mem_stack_signal() occur
at the same time... well, I need the ThreadId (so I can update
tst->sh_esp) which these events don't have. And pre/post_deliver_signal
seem like useful events to have in general. So if there are no further
objections I will commit them.
> > A related question: can anyone think of any other ways in which a
> > register's value (or memory cell's value) could change like this without a
> > skin being aware of it? I'd just like to avoid having to work out any
> > further cases for myself :)
>
> Values returned from client requests are placed in some reg (is it %EDX) ?
> I guess you must have this covered already. Ditto syscalls.
The shadows get set to VG_(written_value) by the core, which my skin
specifies as an "unknown" for which the values don't have to match. With
syscalls I overwrite this "unknown" value with something more informative
in VG_(post_syscall)().
> make_thread_jump_to_cancelhdlr() -- part of the threading stuff -- messes
> with %ESP as well. It's pretty rare though.
That's why it's useful to know -- saves me hunting it down in some large
program that dies after one million basic blocks :) Unfortunately, it's a
tricky case because again there's no way for a skin to know about this...
new_mem_stack isn't called because:
/* Push a bogus return address. It will not return, but we still
need to have it so that the arg is at the correct stack offset.
Don't mark as readable; any attempt to read this is and internal
valgrind bug since thread_exit_wrapper should not return. */
Hmm. There's a conflict of interest between skins here -- new_mem_stack
can be used to identify newly addressible memory, and it can also be used
to identify when %esp is changed. MemCheck/AddrCheck don't want
new_mem_stack to be called here, but my new skin does. Hmm.
Also, I again need the ThreadId, which new_mem_stack doesn't have anyway.
Looking elsewhere more carefully, %esp is fiddled with in
do__apply_in_new_thread too. That one's easier to spot because there is a
new_mem_stack call there, but still the lack of ThreadId is a problem.
Maybe I could just set every thread's sh_esp as unknown. Maybe I could
just tolerate occasional unexpected changes in %esp in my skin. Hmm.
N
|