valgrind-users — General discussion list for Valgrind users

Re: [Valgrind-users] Why valgrind tool massif does not print xtree callstack? (arm)

[Philippe W. <phi...@sk...>]

Which version of valgrind are you using ?
You much better should use the last released version (or a more recent GIT version).

Have you compiled your application with -g ?

In case you debug your native executable with gdb and put a break on malloc,
is gdb backtrace command giving a good stack trace ?

If you then debug using  gdb+vgdb your executable running under valgrind,
is then the gdb backtrace correct ?
And when positioned on the break point, what is the output of
   (gdb) monitor v.info scheduler

Thanks
Philippe

On Fri, 2020-12-11 at 15:02 +0100, Łukasz Bolda wrote:
> Hello!
> This is my first message on this list, so I'd like to say hi to everyone!
> 
> I'm profiling my software using valgrind tool massif  on arm hardware with
> parameters like this:
> valgrind --tool=massif --massif-out-file=massif.out.%p --xtree-memory=full
> --verbose MY_BIN
> 
> Unfortuatelly i do not receive any callstack in the results:
> ms_print massif.out.1234
> (...)
> 99.87% (20,675,133B) (heap allocation functions) malloc/new/new[],
> --alloc-fns, etc.
> ->99.87% (20,675,133B) 0xFFFFFFFF: ???
> 
> 
> What sould i do to receive full callstacks from massif?
> 
> Same thing happens when i'm using this tool on system binary for eg. ls.
> Only 0xFFFFFFFF is present.
> 
> On my x86 machine everything runs fine.
> 
> Greetings,
> Łukasz Bolda
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Valgrind-users mailing list
> Val...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-users

[Valgrind-users] Why valgrind tool massif does not print xtree callstack? (arm)

[Łukasz B. <Luk...@ra...>]

Hello!
This is my first message on this list, so I'd like to say hi to everyone!

I'm profiling my software using valgrind tool massif  on arm hardware with
parameters like this:
valgrind --tool=massif --massif-out-file=massif.out.%p --xtree-memory=full
--verbose MY_BIN

Unfortuatelly i do not receive any callstack in the results:
ms_print massif.out.1234
(...)
99.87% (20,675,133B) (heap allocation functions) malloc/new/new[],
--alloc-fns, etc.
->99.87% (20,675,133B) 0xFFFFFFFF: ???


What sould i do to receive full callstacks from massif?

Same thing happens when i'm using this tool on system binary for eg. ls.
Only 0xFFFFFFFF is present.

On my x86 machine everything runs fine.

Greetings,
Łukasz Bolda

Re: [Valgrind-users] 3.16.1 RPi 3b+

[John R. <jr...@bi...>]

On 2020-12-07 20:22 UTC, John A wrote:
  [[attachment smime.p7m]]

Send the body of the message in plain text,
perhaps crypto-signed with the signature in an attachment.
Nobody pays any attention to a .p7m body.

[Valgrind-users] 3.16.1 RPi 3b+

[John A <jo...@ar...>]

0€	*†H†÷

 €0€

10	+

[Valgrind-users] Obtaining Use-Def information of temporaries in VEX-IR

[Yashas A. <es1...@ii...>]

Hello

I'm trying to write a Valgrind tool that will obtain Use-Def information of
temporary values in VEX-IR, i.e, the definition of a temporary value and
its uses in the IR. Does an implementation of this already exist in
Valgrind which I can use, or should I start from scratch?

Thanks
Yashas

-- 


Disclaimer:- The information contained in this electronic message and any 
attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the 
addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this email. Please notify the sender 
immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. The 
views expressed in this E-mail message (including the enclosure/(s) or 
attachment/(s) if any) are those of the individual sender, except where the 
sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of IIT 
Hyderabad. Before opening any mail and attachments please check them for 
viruses, malware, and the sender email address is indeed from IITH domain. 
IITH does not accept any liability for malware infected mails.

Re: [Valgrind-users] Automated report for valgrind

[John R. <jr...@bi...>]

> I would like to ask if there is any automated reporting tool which processes the output of the valgrind tool and also scans the code in order to do a "blame" or "annotate" per developer.

The real error (the place that needs fixing) can be several levels up the call chain,
and in C++ is not always the most-recent non-STL code.  Identifying the root cause
can require an experienced human in many cases.

[Valgrind-users] Automated report for valgrind

[Dimitris K. <kat...@gm...>]

Hi everyone,

I would like to ask if there is any automated reporting tool which
processes the output of the valgrind tool and also scans the code in order
to do a "blame" or "annotate" per developer.

Thanks

Re: [Valgrind-users] License Question

[Mark W. <ma...@kl...>]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 08, 2020 at 01:06:39PM -0500, Rayce West wrote:
> After researching GGPL some, I'm wondering how it's possible that angr (and
> pyvex) are allowed to use BSD licenses when they integrate VEX as their
> lifter and IR, especially since it's the General and not the Lesser?

It is fine to combine code under a lax-permissive license like the BSD
and code under the GPL, like valgrind. As long as the licenses don't
conflict and the program as a whole is distributed under the GPL. See
GPLv2, section 2 (b).

Cheers,

Mark

[Valgrind-users] License Question

[Rayce W. <rwest@g.clemson.edu>]

Hello,

After researching GGPL some, I'm wondering how it's possible that angr (and
pyvex) are allowed to use BSD licenses when they integrate VEX as their
lifter and IR, especially since it's the General and not the Lesser?  It's
not that I wish to cause them any trouble, I've just been considering using
VEX for other work myself and I (frankly) wouldn't want to GPL it if I
did.

Thanks for any insight!

Rayce

Re: [Valgrind-users] Partial heap profiling with Massif

[LEPAREUR L. <loi...@ce...>]

Le 29/09/2020 à 15:19, Milian Wolff a écrit :
> On Dienstag, 29. September 2020 12:19:24 CEST LEPAREUR Loic wrote:
>> Le 21/09/2020 à 17:04, Milian Wolff a écrit :
>>> On Donnerstag, 17. September 2020 15:32:04 CEST John Reiser wrote:
>>>> On 2020-09-17 LEPAREUR Loic wrote:
>>>>> Several years ago, I developed a Massif patch to let the client code
>>>>> select which part of the code should be profiled with Massif.
>>>> Today this is much less interesting unless you compare and contrast with
>>>> https://github.com/KDE/heaptrack .  Do a web search for "heaptrack vs
>>>> massif". Consider particularly "A Faster Massif" in
>>>> https://milianw.de/tag/heaptrack , and
>>>> https://milianw.de/tag/massif-visualizer .
>>> In other news: I just pushed a bunch of patches to heaptrack git which
>>> allow you to do time-diffing. I.e. you can now select a time range in the
>>> charts and then request filtering to show the delta costs between the two
>>> time points.
>>>
>>> This should allow you to solve your problem nicely.
>>>
>>> Alternatively, you can also runtime-attach heaptrack after you finished
>>> your initialization phase to only record the main computational loop. The
>>> overhead should be minimal or actually close to zero when your main loop
>>> isn't allocating anything.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>> OK, thanks for pointing that out. I didn't know about it, I will give it
>> a try.
>>
>> Heaptrack requires recent versions of KChart and Qt for the GUI and it
>> isn't easy to upgrade them here.
> What do you mean by "recent" - to my knowledge it can build with some-years-
> old versions of both ;-)
>
> But even then, you can just download the AppImage and don't need to install
> anything then:
>
> https://download.kde.org/stable/heaptrack/1.2.0/
>
>> And since you LD_PRELOAD Heaptrack, it
>> would be very easy to add client requests mechanism, but I will try
>> vanilla version first.
> Yes, there's already `heaptrack_api.h`, which could be expanded to add support
> for client markers or similar.
>
> Cheers
>
Sorry, I only meant : "more recent that what I have here".

OK I will try the AppImage, it's nice it exists one.

Loïc

Re: [Valgrind-users] running valgrind on dpdk

[John R. <jr...@bi...>]

On 2020-09-29  Prujan, Michael wrote:

> I’m running valgrind-3.16.1 on application with DPDK.
> 
> I got the following errors:
> 
> ERROR: This system does not support "FSGSBASE".

That's correct: the virtual machine that valgrind exports to the app,
does not support FSGSBASE.  The valgrind source says:
     ./VEX/priv/guest_amd64_helpers.c:            /* Don't advertise FSGSBASE support, bit 0 in EBX.  */

Perhaps you could develop the support for fsgsbase, and submit the implementation patch?

[Valgrind-users] running valgrind on dpdk

[Prujan, M. <Mic...@ve...>]

Hi,
I'm running valgrind-3.16.1 on application with DPDK.
I got the following errors:

ERROR: This system does not support "FSGSBASE".
Please check that RTE_MACHINE is set correctly.
EAL: FATAL: unsupported cpu type.
EAL: unsupported cpu type.

However, FSGSBASE exists.
Cat /proc/cpuinfo:

flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc art arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf eagerfpu pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 sdbg fma cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid dca sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm abm 3dnowprefetch epb cat_l3 cdp_l3 intel_pt mba tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid fsgsbase tsc_adjust bmi1 hle avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid rtm cqm mpx rdt_a avx512f avx512dq rdseed adx smap clflushopt clwb avx512cd avx512bw avx512vl xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 cqm_llc cqm_occup_llc cqm_mbm_total cqm_mbm_local ibpb ibrs stibp dtherm arat pln pts pku ospke spec_ctrl intel_stibp


I compiled DPDK, without that flag,... application is not running!!!!

Thanks,
Michael.



This electronic message may contain proprietary and confidential information of Verint Systems Inc., its affiliates and/or subsidiaries. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive this e-mail for the intended recipient), you may not use, copy, disclose or distribute to anyone this message or any information contained in this message. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us by replying to this e-mail.

Re: [Valgrind-users] Partial heap profiling with Massif

[Milian W. <ma...@mi...>]

On Dienstag, 29. September 2020 12:19:24 CEST LEPAREUR Loic wrote:
> Le 21/09/2020 à 17:04, Milian Wolff a écrit :
> > On Donnerstag, 17. September 2020 15:32:04 CEST John Reiser wrote:
> >> On 2020-09-17 LEPAREUR Loic wrote:
> >>> Several years ago, I developed a Massif patch to let the client code
> >>> select which part of the code should be profiled with Massif.
> >> 
> >> Today this is much less interesting unless you compare and contrast with
> >> https://github.com/KDE/heaptrack .  Do a web search for "heaptrack vs
> >> massif". Consider particularly "A Faster Massif" in
> >> https://milianw.de/tag/heaptrack , and
> >> https://milianw.de/tag/massif-visualizer .
> > 
> > In other news: I just pushed a bunch of patches to heaptrack git which
> > allow you to do time-diffing. I.e. you can now select a time range in the
> > charts and then request filtering to show the delta costs between the two
> > time points.
> > 
> > This should allow you to solve your problem nicely.
> > 
> > Alternatively, you can also runtime-attach heaptrack after you finished
> > your initialization phase to only record the main computational loop. The
> > overhead should be minimal or actually close to zero when your main loop
> > isn't allocating anything.
> > 
> > Cheers
> 
> OK, thanks for pointing that out. I didn't know about it, I will give it
> a try.
> 
> Heaptrack requires recent versions of KChart and Qt for the GUI and it
> isn't easy to upgrade them here.

What do you mean by "recent" - to my knowledge it can build with some-years-
old versions of both ;-)

But even then, you can just download the AppImage and don't need to install 
anything then:

https://download.kde.org/stable/heaptrack/1.2.0/

> And since you LD_PRELOAD Heaptrack, it
> would be very easy to add client requests mechanism, but I will try
> vanilla version first.

Yes, there's already `heaptrack_api.h`, which could be expanded to add support 
for client markers or similar.

Cheers

-- 
Milian Wolff
ma...@mi...
http://milianw.de

Re: [Valgrind-users] Partial heap profiling with Massif

[LEPAREUR L. <loi...@ce...>]

Le 21/09/2020 à 17:04, Milian Wolff a écrit :
> On Donnerstag, 17. September 2020 15:32:04 CEST John Reiser wrote:
>> On 2020-09-17 LEPAREUR Loic wrote:
>>> Several years ago, I developed a Massif patch to let the client code
>>> select which part of the code should be profiled with Massif.
>> Today this is much less interesting unless you compare and contrast with
>> https://github.com/KDE/heaptrack .  Do a web search for "heaptrack vs
>> massif". Consider particularly "A Faster Massif" in
>> https://milianw.de/tag/heaptrack , and
>> https://milianw.de/tag/massif-visualizer .
> In other news: I just pushed a bunch of patches to heaptrack git which allow
> you to do time-diffing. I.e. you can now select a time range in the charts and
> then request filtering to show the delta costs between the two time points.
>
> This should allow you to solve your problem nicely.
>
> Alternatively, you can also runtime-attach heaptrack after you finished your
> initialization phase to only record the main computational loop. The overhead
> should be minimal or actually close to zero when your main loop isn't
> allocating anything.
>
> Cheers
>
OK, thanks for pointing that out. I didn't know about it, I will give it 
a try.

Heaptrack requires recent versions of KChart and Qt for the GUI and it 
isn't easy to upgrade them here. And since you LD_PRELOAD Heaptrack, it 
would be very easy to add client requests mechanism, but I will try 
vanilla version first.

Cheers

Re: [Valgrind-users] Partial heap profiling with Massif

[Milian W. <ma...@mi...>]

On Donnerstag, 17. September 2020 15:32:04 CEST John Reiser wrote:
> On 2020-09-17 LEPAREUR Loic wrote:
> > Several years ago, I developed a Massif patch to let the client code
> > select which part of the code should be profiled with Massif.

> Today this is much less interesting unless you compare and contrast with
> https://github.com/KDE/heaptrack .  Do a web search for "heaptrack vs
> massif". Consider particularly "A Faster Massif" in 
> https://milianw.de/tag/heaptrack , and 
> https://milianw.de/tag/massif-visualizer .

In other news: I just pushed a bunch of patches to heaptrack git which allow 
you to do time-diffing. I.e. you can now select a time range in the charts and 
then request filtering to show the delta costs between the two time points.

This should allow you to solve your problem nicely.

Alternatively, you can also runtime-attach heaptrack after you finished your 
initialization phase to only record the main computational loop. The overhead 
should be minimal or actually close to zero when your main loop isn't 
allocating anything.

Cheers

-- 
Milian Wolff
ma...@mi...
http://milianw.de

Re: [Valgrind-users] Partial heap profiling with Massif

[John R. <jr...@bi...>]

On 2020-09-17 LEPAREUR Loic wrote:

> Several years ago, I developed a Massif patch to let the client code select which part of the code should be profiled with Massif.

Today this is much less interesting unless you compare and contrast with
https://github.com/KDE/heaptrack .  Do a web search for "heaptrack vs massif".
Consider particularly "A Faster Massif" in  https://milianw.de/tag/heaptrack ,
and  https://milianw.de/tag/massif-visualizer .

[Valgrind-users] Partial heap profiling with Massif

[LEPAREUR L. <loi...@ce...>]

Hi,

Several years ago, I developed a Massif patch to let the client code 
select which part of the code should be profiled with Massif. This is 
particulary useful for scientific simulation codes which often have two 
phases during the run :

   1) initialisation's phase
   2) main computational loop (heavy CPU load)

During phase 1, one allocates a lot of memory (reading meshes, creating 
variables, ...) but the critical part is the main loop : bogus codes 
slightly increase memory consumption but the increase due to one 
iteration of the loop is tiny compared to the total amount of memory 
allocated before the main loop. Since the memory is freed after the 
loop, this is not a leak, but the code can run out of memory because 
there are thousands and thousands of iterations.

To detect the problem with Massif, one has to let the code run many 
iterations of the loop under valgrind ... and it's way too slow. The 
patch I've made ease the detection of such a problem within just a few 
iterations. It consists in two new command line options and three 
client's requests :

--record-from-start=yes/no : this disables heap profiling until Massif 
meets the client's request which tells it to start profiling the heap 
(see below).

--disable-auto-snapshots=yes/no : this disables all the snapshots except 
the ones that are explicitly asked in a client's request.

VALGRIND_START_MEM_RECORDING : this request tells Massif to start heap 
profiling.

VALGRIND_STOP_MEM_RECORDING : this request tells Massif to stop heap 
profiling.

VALGRIND_TAKE_DETAILED_SNAPSHOT : this request tells Massif to take a 
detailed snapshot.

So using VALGRIND_START_MEM_RECORDING just before the main loop and 
VALGRIND_TAKE_DETAILED_SNAPSHOT at the beginning of the loop, Massif can 
report exactly what is going on during the main loop. As an example, I 
made a regression test which simulates that problem (big initial 
allocation and then tiny allocations in a loop).

Massif report without the patch:

     MB
1.001^ :
      | #::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::@:::::::::
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
      |          #:::::::::::: :::: :::: ::: ::::::::::: :::: ::: ::@
    0 
+----------------------------------------------------------------------->MB
0 7.056

Massif report with the patch:

      B
216^ @
| @
| @
| @@@@@@@@
| @      @
| @@@@@@@@@      @
|                                                        @ @      @
      | @@@@@@@@@       @      @
      | @       @       @      @
      | @@@@@@@@@       @       @      @
      |                                        @ @       @       @      @
      |                                        @ @       @       @      @
      |                                @@@@@@@@@ @       @       @      @
      |                                @       @ @       @       @      @
      |                        @@@@@@@@@       @ @       @       @      @
      |                        @       @       @ @       @       @      @
      |                @@@@@@@@@       @       @ @       @       @      @
      |                @       @       @       @ @       @       @      @
      |        @@@@@@@@@       @       @       @ @       @       @      @
      |        @       @       @       @       @ @       @       @      @
    0 
+----------------------------------------------------------------------->MB
0 4.550

I've developed the patch in a GIT branch that I've just rebased on the 
master. I've updated the docs (NEWS, manual, ...) and created a 
regression test for it in massif/tests. I think this feature could 
interest other developers of scientific codes (even if, I think, DHAT 
can now help with such issue), so if you (valgrind developers) think it 
could be interesting to take a look at it, let me know : I can send you 
the patch or do a pull request.

Thanks,
Loïc

Re: [Valgrind-users] massif & counts per type

[Philippe W. <phi...@sk...>]

On Fri, 2020-09-11 at 12:38 +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> And finally, with heaptrack it is also not yet easily doable to get a diff 
> between two time stamps. Also a feature I've long thought about implementing, 
> but never got around to...
Note that valgrind allows to report a "delta/diff" memory heap status e.g.
under memcheck. See memcheck leak_check monitor command.

Philippe

Re: [Valgrind-users] massif & counts per type

[Philippe W. <phi...@sk...>]

On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 15:26 +0200, folkert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> How can I obtain the number of mallocs per type in a time-frame using
> massif? I'm NOT interested in the total in use, I would like to know how
> often type x is allocated between t+1 and t+2.
You could run your application under valgrind + gdb/vgdb.
You can then put breakpoints at relevant places to trigger them at
t+1 and t+2.

You can then e.g. run with memcheck and have delta malloc info
being reported, using the memcheck monitor command leak_check.
This command can show the delta "alloc/free" since the previous
call.

Philippe

Re: [Valgrind-users] valgrind always fails with out of memory

[Philippe W. <phi...@sk...>]

On Tue, 2020-09-08 at 14:09 +0200, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
> On 08.09.20 12:25, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
> > On 08.09.20 12:04, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
> > > The error I get most frequently is (full output attached in log.txt)
> > > ==32==     Valgrind's memory management: out of memory:
> > > ==32==        newSuperblock's request for 6864695621860790272 bytes failed.
> > > ==32==          114,106,368 bytes have already been mmap-ed ANONYMOUS.
> > 
> > Argh! After sending the email, I went through the stack trace for
> > the hundredth time, and spotted the use of "zlib". And indeed, when
> > replacing my own zlib 1.2.11 with the system zlib 1.2.11, valgrind
> > works as expected!
> > 
> > Does that make sense? Is zlib used by valgrind itself? And why could
> > my debug build differ (so much) from the system zlib that it breaks
> > valgrind? I double-checked and its the identical source code from
> > Ubuntu, just missing two or three patches.
> 
> So it seems I can (partially) answer my own question: when valgrind
> is used on an executable that links zlib built with -ggdb3, then it
> does not work (due to aforementioned error). Keeping all other debug-
> settings except -ggdb3 works still fine.
> 
> I have no clue as to _why_ this may happen, but I hope it can be
> helpful to other people running into the same issue.
zlib is not used by the valgrind tools. In fact, valgrind tools
do not use any library (even not libc).

The above newSuperblock trace shows that a *huge* block is requested.
As this bug only happens when you use -ggdb3, this is likely a problem
in the debuginfo reader of valgrind: some debug info generated by 
-ggdb3 is very probably not handled properly.

I have recompiled libz with -ggdb3, but no problem when running this
lib under valgrind.

We might have a more clear idea of what happens on your side 
by adding some trace.

The best is to file a bug on bugzilla, and attach the output of
running valgrind with -d -d -d -v -v -v.

That might give some information about what is wrong
and possibly some more detailed trace can then be activated.

Thanks
Philippe

Re: [Valgrind-users] massif & counts per type

[folkert <fo...@va...>]

> Anyhow, it sounds like you are starting to reinvent heaptrack - it does 
> exactly the above and then some.

Indeed it does: I looked at and it is perfectly for my use-case.
Thank you!

[Valgrind-users] Not seeing error line numberings

[Pakize S. <psa...@fa...>]

Hi,

Somehow I am not able to see error line numberings when I try to test a
Microsoft library: https://github.com/microsoft/PQCrypto-SIDH. I compiled
the library by using the command:

   $ make ARCH=x64 CC=gcc OPT_LEVEL=GENERIC

I also changed the optimization level as -g and added -static option before
compiling. Then I used the command:

   $ valgrind --leak-check=full --show-leak-kinds=all --track-origins=yes
--dsymutil=yes ./test_SIKE

with the executable file is under PQCrypto-SIDH/sike503/.

However, I got the errors always as "below main" even if I added some
errors myself to the code consciously.

The reason could be related to the Makefile of the library. I checked most
of the reasons for that but I could not find the solution.

Thank you,
Pakize

Re: [Valgrind-users] massif & counts per type

[John R. <jr...@bi...>]

On 2020-09-11 at 10:50 UTC, folkert wrote:
    [snip]]
> This morning I came up with an other solution: I made a LD_PRELOAD
> wrapper which counts every malloc-call. Decided that allocated-type is
> not really required in my case, but to know which malloc did it would
> work as well.

For a random C++ program, then most calls to malloc are made by 'operator new'
or some closely-related flavor.  After that comes std::string::alloc<...>.
You *really* want 'heaptrack'.  Get it (and libunwind)!  Use it!
Do not waste your time trying to concoct anything else.

Re: [Valgrind-users] massif & counts per type

[Milian W. <ma...@mi...>]

On Freitag, 11. September 2020 12:50:18 CEST folkert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > > How can I obtain the number of mallocs per type in a time-frame using
> > > massif? I'm NOT interested in the total in use, I would like to know how
> > > often type x is allocated between t+1 and t+2.
> > 
> > To my knowledge, this data is not recorded by Massif. You could try to
> > have a look at heaptrack [1] instead.
> > 
> > [1]: https://invent.kde.org/sdk/heaptrack
> > 
> > Note though that on Linux, malloc does not retain any type information. As
> > such, even with heaptrack you cannot easily filter by type. But by
> > leveraging the flamegraph you can often still get a similar intuition
> > based on the callstacks. I have an idea to parse the callstack code lines
> > to find type information from the call to `new` but that's probably quite
> > hairy to get right in practice. Suggestions welcome on how to trace the
> > type information!
> > 
> > And finally, with heaptrack it is also not yet easily doable to get a diff
> > between two time stamps. Also a feature I've long thought about
> > implementing, but never got around to...
> 
> This morning I came up with an other solution: I made a LD_PRELOAD
> wrapper which counts every malloc-call. Decided that allocated-type is
> not really required in my case, but to know which malloc did it would
> work as well.
> So in malloc() I do __builtin_return_address(0), hash the pointer and
> use that as an index in array of counters.
> 
> Gives me:
> 
> pointer          count
> ...
> 000000000041db10 00000000002a427
> 00007ffff4a6c1b1 00000000007f1da
> 
> Going from 000000000041db10 to a symbol works fine, the shared library
> (00007ffff4a6c1b1) is a bit troublesome though (disabled
> randomize_va_space and using eu-addr2line).

You have to take the memory mapping of the library into account and subtract 
that offset from the address.

Anyhow, it sounds like you are starting to reinvent heaptrack - it does 
exactly the above and then some.

Cheers

-- 
Milian Wolff
ma...@mi...
http://milianw.de

Re: [Valgrind-users] massif & counts per type

[Milian W. <ma...@mi...>]

On Donnerstag, 10. September 2020 15:26:37 CEST folkert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> How can I obtain the number of mallocs per type in a time-frame using
> massif? I'm NOT interested in the total in use, I would like to know how
> often type x is allocated between t+1 and t+2.

To my knowledge, this data is not recorded by Massif. You could try to have a 
look at heaptrack [1] instead.

[1]: https://invent.kde.org/sdk/heaptrack

Note though that on Linux, malloc does not retain any type information. As 
such, even with heaptrack you cannot easily filter by type. But by leveraging 
the flamegraph you can often still get a similar intuition based on the 
callstacks. I have an idea to parse the callstack code lines to find type 
information from the call to `new` but that's probably quite hairy to get 
right in practice. Suggestions welcome on how to trace the type information!

And finally, with heaptrack it is also not yet easily doable to get a diff 
between two time stamps. Also a feature I've long thought about implementing, 
but never got around to...

Cheers

-- 
Milian Wolff
ma...@mi...
http://milianw.de