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
(5) |
2
(10) |
3
(9) |
4
(8) |
5
(2) |
6
|
|
7
|
8
(1) |
9
(4) |
10
(2) |
11
|
12
(1) |
13
(2) |
|
14
|
15
(7) |
16
(1) |
17
(9) |
18
(1) |
19
(4) |
20
(4) |
|
21
(1) |
22
(3) |
23
(1) |
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
(2) |
30
(2) |
31
(6) |
|
|
|
|
From: Philippe W. <phi...@sk...> - 2021-03-01 20:41:08
|
Hello Mark,
Thanks for the below.
Recently, I had very little time to contribute.
I hope to have a little bit of more time next week, as I am on holiday
(and "thanks" to covid, on holiday at home).
I would like to work on 2 things:
* look at the nlcontrolc test, and change it so that it does not depend
anymore on the modification of the select arguments.
* I would like to do a small change in the way memcheck reports information
about a block.
Currently, a block is described like this:
==21152== Address 0x4a2f100 is 96 bytes inside a block of size 100,000 alloc'd
I would like to change it so that it contains the block address.
I was thinking to the following format:
==18441== Address 0x4a2f100 is 96 bytes inside the block[size] 0x4a2f0a0[100,000] alloc'd
(i.e. uses a format similar to what the monitor command 'block_list' produces.
It is of course possible to calculate the block address from the given address
and the block offset, but this is annoying/time consuming, in particular when you
do a lot of 'who_points_at' under gdb+vgdb to investigate a logical leak.
So, I would like to make this easier by having the address and size of a block.
There are other places where I would like to use the same format e.g. instead of
having who points at telling:
==21496== Searching for pointers pointing in 16 bytes from 0x4a2f3b0
it could rather show:
==21496== Searching for pointers pointing in block[size] 0x4a2f3b0[16]
Feedback welcome before I start to change the block description (and tests) ...
Thanks
Philippe
On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 14:39 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We discussed doing a valgrind 3.17.0 release on irc a couple of times,
> but don't really seem to have a concrete plan. My hope was that we
> could get everything in before March 1st and then do an RC.
>
> But it is March 1 today and I think we aren't really ready yet.
>
> So can we make a more concrete plan for 3.17.0?
>
> What are the things people believe should go in and which things are
> just nice to have? What would be a good cut-off date when we can create
> a release branch/candidate and only fix release blockers/regressions?
>
> I tried to go through all the bugs being reported (or changed) since
> 3.16.1 was released. And I would like to fix the following:
>
> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1923493
> netresolve: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f34 because valgrind breaks
> on arm64
>
> - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396656
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=427969
> Debian/Ubuntu use dwz in an odd way it seems.
>
> - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=432870
> gdbserver_tests:nlcontrolc hangs with newest glibc2.33 x86-64
>
> - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=431306
> Update demangler to support Rust v0 name mangling
>
> Where the last one is just a nice to have.
>
> I believe things can be ready for a 3.17.0 release branch/candidate by
> end of this week, Friday March 5.
>
> If people have other bugs they like to really get resolved for 3.17.0
> please let me know and I can see how I can help.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Valgrind-developers mailing list
> Val...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers
|
|
From: Paul F. <pj...@wa...> - 2021-03-01 20:37:59
|
On 3/1/21 2:39 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi, > > We discussed doing a valgrind 3.17.0 release on irc a couple of times, > but don't really seem to have a concrete plan. My hope was that we > could get everything in before March 1st and then do an RC. Hi Mark I'll push the changes for *Bug 388787* <https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=388787> - Support for C++17 new/delete tomorrow. A+ Paul |
|
From: Carl L. <ce...@us...> - 2021-03-01 17:57:22
|
Mark, Julian: For PPC64, we have the remaining ISA 3.1 instruction support that we would like to get in for the 3.17 release. There are two existing bugzillas for the support. https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=429354 https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=429375 The patches in these two bugzillas have been reviewed once by Julian. I have updated the patches in both bugzillas per Julian's comments. I am hopefull the patches will be approved when Julian can review them again. The final set of patches for the ISA 3.1 support were posted today in bugzilla: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=433801 These patches are fairly straight forward. I hope we can get them approved fairly quickly so they can be included in the 3.17.0 release. We have an outstanding issue with the scv instruction support, as you know. https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=431157 Looking at your email and internal discussions, it looks like we need the Linux kernel 5.10.14 and the latest glibc to properly test the patch I created. My testing todate has been on an older kernel using a compiler that I have am now told does not have the scv support. I think this issue will need a lot more time before it is ready to be included in mainline. This fix should not be included in 3.17.0. Additionally, we have noticed a number of helgrind failures in our testing on the latest internal prototype hardware with the latest internal compiler. We are investigating these issues. Currently, they do not appear to be related to the ISA 3.1 support. We will update you on these issues as we dig into them further. Thanks. Carl Love On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 14:39 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi, > > We discussed doing a valgrind 3.17.0 release on irc a couple of > times, > but don't really seem to have a concrete plan. My hope was that we > could get everything in before March 1st and then do an RC. > > But it is March 1 today and I think we aren't really ready yet. > > So can we make a more concrete plan for 3.17.0? > > What are the things people believe should go in and which things are > just nice to have? What would be a good cut-off date when we can > create > a release branch/candidate and only fix release blockers/regressions? > > I tried to go through all the bugs being reported (or changed) since > 3.16.1 was released. And I would like to fix the following: > > - > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugzilla.redhat.com_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D1923493&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=RFEmMkZAk--_wFGN5tkM_A&m=htkczODBVgZIXIqrdosIQgJ_rxmXquoMOwpUVQlMc2I&s=D6hL4wfEjz7IOy7eu9P2oeeST2QaXmendCcJCFXs0AE&e= > > netresolve: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f34 because valgrind breaks > on arm64 > > - > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.kde.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D396656&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=RFEmMkZAk--_wFGN5tkM_A&m=htkczODBVgZIXIqrdosIQgJ_rxmXquoMOwpUVQlMc2I&s=BIvrGz7rL1Yklgqvmt9rYswaJ6E7g8IVGgBx8yxVOhE&e= > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.kde.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D427969&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=RFEmMkZAk--_wFGN5tkM_A&m=htkczODBVgZIXIqrdosIQgJ_rxmXquoMOwpUVQlMc2I&s=RfDoGaOrXtWGB7V9Vl5Sfig4-7luXGG09uyz5kZWmdM&e= > > Debian/Ubuntu use dwz in an odd way it seems. > > - > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.kde.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D432870&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=RFEmMkZAk--_wFGN5tkM_A&m=htkczODBVgZIXIqrdosIQgJ_rxmXquoMOwpUVQlMc2I&s=mWKhcMBN7HPGbr1gZXV40laMFZDqlJty34zy87JvpVw&e= > > gdbserver_tests:nlcontrolc hangs with newest glibc2.33 x86-64 > > - > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.kde.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D431306&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=RFEmMkZAk--_wFGN5tkM_A&m=htkczODBVgZIXIqrdosIQgJ_rxmXquoMOwpUVQlMc2I&s=He956C62mh9RbIItPR82QcswHNEGP221hU0h-lYt-WU&e= > > Update demangler to support Rust v0 name mangling > > Where the last one is just a nice to have. > > I believe things can be ready for a 3.17.0 release branch/candidate > by > end of this week, Friday March 5. > > If people have other bugs they like to really get resolved for 3.17.0 > please let me know and I can see how I can help. > > Cheers, > > Mark > > > _______________________________________________ > Valgrind-developers mailing list > Val...@li... > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.sourceforge.net_lists_listinfo_valgrind-2Ddevelopers&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=RFEmMkZAk--_wFGN5tkM_A&m=htkczODBVgZIXIqrdosIQgJ_rxmXquoMOwpUVQlMc2I&s=0qiyjFjH3fr9ITog5R-mqlMMSYId9Q45YVQC8J0DKI0&e= |
|
From: will s. <wil...@vn...> - 2021-03-01 16:24:44
|
On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 14:39 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi, > > We discussed doing a valgrind 3.17.0 release on irc a couple of > times, > but don't really seem to have a concrete plan. My hope was that we > could get everything in before March 1st and then do an RC. > > But it is March 1 today and I think we aren't really ready yet. > > So can we make a more concrete plan for 3.17.0? > > What are the things people believe should go in and which things are > just nice to have? What would be a good cut-off date when we can > create > a release branch/candidate and only fix release blockers/regressions? > > I tried to go through all the bugs being reported (or changed) since > 3.16.1 was released. And I would like to fix the following: > > - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1923493 > netresolve: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f34 because valgrind breaks > on arm64 > > - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396656 > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=427969 > Debian/Ubuntu use dwz in an odd way it seems. > > - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=432870 > gdbserver_tests:nlcontrolc hangs with newest glibc2.33 x86-64 > > - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=431306 > Update demangler to support Rust v0 name mangling > > Where the last one is just a nice to have. > > I believe things can be ready for a 3.17.0 release branch/candidate > by > end of this week, Friday March 5. > > If people have other bugs they like to really get resolved for 3.17.0 > please let me know and I can see how I can help. Hi Mark, I would like to see the remainder of the power10 enablement patches make it in. I *think* this is now down to two updated and pending revised review patch sets, 429354 , 429375 The SCV and DARN bugs would ideally be resolved, but they will take as long as they take. There is one additional patch set for power10 support that enables a small number of instructions that we can not yet verify on our early hardware. That patch needs to be posted for review. The window of that one is shrinking,.. Thanks -Will > > Cheers, > > Mark > > > _______________________________________________ > Valgrind-developers mailing list > Val...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers |
|
From: Mark W. <ma...@kl...> - 2021-03-01 13:39:40
|
Hi, We discussed doing a valgrind 3.17.0 release on irc a couple of times, but don't really seem to have a concrete plan. My hope was that we could get everything in before March 1st and then do an RC. But it is March 1 today and I think we aren't really ready yet. So can we make a more concrete plan for 3.17.0? What are the things people believe should go in and which things are just nice to have? What would be a good cut-off date when we can create a release branch/candidate and only fix release blockers/regressions? I tried to go through all the bugs being reported (or changed) since 3.16.1 was released. And I would like to fix the following: - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1923493 netresolve: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f34 because valgrind breaks on arm64 - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396656 https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=427969 Debian/Ubuntu use dwz in an odd way it seems. - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=432870 gdbserver_tests:nlcontrolc hangs with newest glibc2.33 x86-64 - https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=431306 Update demangler to support Rust v0 name mangling Where the last one is just a nice to have. I believe things can be ready for a 3.17.0 release branch/candidate by end of this week, Friday March 5. If people have other bugs they like to really get resolved for 3.17.0 please let me know and I can see how I can help. Cheers, Mark |