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
(9) |
2
(13) |
3
(3) |
4
(3) |
5
(4) |
|
6
(2) |
7
(4) |
8
(3) |
9
(2) |
10
|
11
|
12
(6) |
|
13
(6) |
14
(1) |
15
(2) |
16
(2) |
17
(2) |
18
|
19
|
|
20
|
21
|
22
(1) |
23
|
24
(2) |
25
(5) |
26
|
|
27
(1) |
28
(8) |
29
(3) |
30
|
|
|
|
|
From: Josef W. <Jos...@gm...> - 2003-04-15 17:14:19
|
On Tuesday 15 April 2003 17:53, you wrote: > On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: > > I copied vg_skin.h to my skin package, and it compiled and runs without > > any problem. It seems that for my skin the interface hasn't changed at > > all. Or should I look out for something? Can you point out what the > > changes are if a skin doesn't need/touches malloc ? > > For your case, I think the only change is that SK_(usage)() has become > SK_(print_usage)() + SK_(print_debug_usage)(). Try giving a bogus command > line option and see if it works. Yes. Thanks for the hint. > Oh, and it's not binary compatible since a lot of needs were removed, but > having recompiled you won't see that. You recently changed the interface version in CVS, so the skin wasn't working without recompilation at all :-) > > The best is that (almost?) no functions of valgrind.so are called now. > > Aside from malloc/free/new/delete, I had the following called from > > clients previously, too: strlen, memchr, strcmp, strchr, memcpy. > > These are all from libc.so now. Seems quite a good change to me. > > Yes. The only ones called now (by default) are those in vg_intercept.c > and vg_libpthread.c. Yes. With a multithreaded test prog, there are a *lot* of calls to VG_(startup), called by ensure_valgrind() in vg_pthreads.c. Looking at the code, I saw that libpthread.so isn't compiled with -fPIC: the call to VG_(startup) does *not* go over a PLT entry, but is a simple call needing relocation. Is this the intended behaviour? On looking at this, I found a bug in V. In valgrind.so, my linker puts the code for "void VG_(sigshutdown_actions) ( void )" from vg_signals.c directly before VG_(startup). And when running the cachegrind skin (your version!), I get ... fl=vg_signals.c fn=??? 1566 609 3 2 609 6 2 fi=??? 0 609 0 0 ... As VG_(sigshutdown_actions) is never called in the test, and vg_signals.c:1566 is the closing brace of that function, there must be a off-by-1 error regarding line debug information lookup, at least for DWARF 2. As the annotated source with my calltree already looked a little weird for some time (at least V 1.9.4 and V 1.9.5), I suppose it's the same bug. I'm a little short of time, but I will look into this. > > > > Apologies to those maintaining patches against the head, I hope you can > > > update and regenerate them without too much trouble. > > > > At least from my side, no trouble at all. > > Thanks again. > > Good, you're welcome. I hope this helps make Calltree's profiling more > accurate. It can make quite a difference with Cachegrind -- all the > malloc/free instructions weren't being profiled before, now they are. Of course this is *very* useful. I thought already about an alternative way, introducing "correction" cost events when calling some function (or using a client request). This is still usefull to somehow "correctify" kernel cost of system calls with some average values. Josef > > N |
|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...> - 2003-04-15 13:07:43
|
Hi, I just made a big commit. Valgrind now longer overrides malloc() et al by default, it's up to individual skins to override those functions if they need to know about heap memory. This makes the core/skin split much cleaner. The core/skin interface has changed a bit as a result. I have (of course) updated all the distributed skins, but external skins (eg. Josef's calltree) will need to be updated. The changes aren't very big; sorry about this, but it was necessary. Apologies to those maintaining patches against the head, I hope you can update and regenerate them without too much trouble. N |