valgrind-users

[Valgrind-users] Adding suppressions generates significantly more errors

[Kevin L. <kd...@qt...>]

I had a relatively simple suppression file that generated ~500 errors.  I
wrote a script to select certain errors for suppression and generate an
additional suppression file.  When I run with this additional suppression
file, my errors explode to over 3000 errors.  I was expecting my errors to
decrease from the previous 500 level.  Any ideas on why maybe happening?

Also, the execution time expanded by 42%.  This could be due to the
significantly larger suppression list.

Kevin



--
View this message in context: http://valgrind.10908.n7.nabble.com/Adding-suppressions-generates-significantly-more-errors-tp45799.html
Sent from the Valgrind - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [Valgrind-users] Adding suppressions generates significantly more errors

[Paul F. <pa...@fr...>]

On 2 Jul 2013, at 19:01, Kevin Lee wrote:

> I had a relatively simple suppression file that generated ~500 errors.  I
> wrote a script to select certain errors for suppression and generate an
> additional suppression file.  When I run with this additional suppression
> file, my errors explode to over 3000 errors.  I was expecting my errors to
> decrease from the previous 500 level.  Any ideas on why maybe happening?
> 
> Also, the execution time expanded by 42%.  This could be due to the
> significantly larger suppression list.


Hi

I assume that this is with memcheck?

Can you tell if the new errors are leak/reachable related?

A+
Paul

Re: [Valgrind-users] Adding suppressions generates significantly more errors

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

On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 10:01 -0700, Kevin Lee wrote:
> I had a relatively simple suppression file that generated ~500 errors.  I
> wrote a script to select certain errors for suppression and generate an
> additional suppression file.  When I run with this additional suppression
> file, my errors explode to over 3000 errors.  I was expecting my errors to
> decrease from the previous 500 level.  Any ideas on why maybe happening?
No, but a guess might benefit from more  information such as
which tool with which options, what errors are being suppressed, and
 what are the new errors that are appearing when adding 
suppression entries, ...

And of course, a (if possible small) compilable test case will for
sure help the most.

> 
> Also, the execution time expanded by 42%.  This could be due to the
> significantly larger suppression list.
Also, would be nice to know the version of Valgrind you are using.

Note that in 3.8.1, the suppression matching mechanism was optimised.
In 3.9.0 (not yet released), the leak suppression entries can be
made more precise (e.g. to only match definite leaks).

Philippe