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
(25) |
2
(13) |
3
(3) |
|
4
|
5
(5) |
6
(12) |
7
(5) |
8
(16) |
9
(3) |
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
(4) |
14
(1) |
15
(2) |
16
(6) |
17
|
|
18
|
19
(1) |
20
(2) |
21
(10) |
22
(9) |
23
(8) |
24
(5) |
|
25
|
26
(6) |
27
(8) |
28
(8) |
29
(23) |
30
(12) |
31
(6) |
|
From: Bert W. <ber...@go...> - 2010-07-13 16:39:36
|
Hi all, I needed a new client request for the MEMPOOL system, so that I can drop any chunks in a specified range. I use this in a custom allocator, which handles pages out and they can be freed at once, without knowing how man requests this page currently has. The current implementation of VALGRIND_MEMPOOL_DROP() does remove any chunks which intersects with the range, not only chunks which are entirely inside the range and it wont split up partial chunks. I have no problem to make this more restrict, so that only requests which are inside the range are droped, or to make it more like TRIM to split up partial chunks. Any feedback is more than welcomed. Thanks. Regards, Bert |
|
From: Konstantin S. <kon...@gm...> - 2010-07-13 12:53:48
|
Any suggestion? --kcc On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Serebryany <kon...@gm...> wrote: > Hi, > > Consider an application has its own way of asking memory from OS: > char* my_malloc(size_t size). > Is there a way to steal my_malloc() from the application so that > valgrind core (newSuperblock from coregrind/m_mallocfree.c) can use > this function instead of VG_(am_sbrk_anon_float_*)? > I need this to run valgrind on a system where most of the memory is > allocated to hugepages and hence is not available to > VG_(am_sbrk_anon_float_*). > > Thanks, > > --kcc > |
|
From: Bert W. <ber...@go...> - 2010-07-13 12:41:09
|
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 13:59, Bert Wesarg <ber...@go...> wrote:
> The loop checks whether the next chunk starts before the current
> chunk, but the chunk number printed was that of the current chunk.
Sorry, I have misread the message, I read "predecessor" not
"successor". Please ignore this patch.
>
> Fix this.
>
> Regards,
> Bert
>
> Index: memcheck/mc_malloc_wrappers.c
> ===================================================================
> --- memcheck/mc_malloc_wrappers.c (revision 11212)
> +++ memcheck/mc_malloc_wrappers.c (working copy)
> @@ -618,7 +618,7 @@
> if (chunks[i]->data + chunks[i]->szB > chunks[i+1]->data ) {
> VG_(message)(Vg_UserMsg,
> "Mempool chunk %d / %d overlaps with its successor\n",
> - i+1, n_chunks);
> + i+2, n_chunks);
> bad = 1;
> }
> }
>
|
|
From: Bert W. <ber...@go...> - 2010-07-13 11:59:31
|
The loop checks whether the next chunk starts before the current
chunk, but the chunk number printed was that of the current chunk.
Fix this.
Regards,
Bert
Index: memcheck/mc_malloc_wrappers.c
===================================================================
--- memcheck/mc_malloc_wrappers.c (revision 11212)
+++ memcheck/mc_malloc_wrappers.c (working copy)
@@ -618,7 +618,7 @@
if (chunks[i]->data + chunks[i]->szB > chunks[i+1]->data ) {
VG_(message)(Vg_UserMsg,
"Mempool chunk %d / %d overlaps with its successor\n",
- i+1, n_chunks);
+ i+2, n_chunks);
bad = 1;
}
}
|