|
From: Jeroen J. <jer...@gm...> - 2004-11-11 11:03:46
|
Hello, I'm trying to run a program that uses shmat (fox example, the valgrind test program as_shm in corecheck\tests). However, I get a valgrind warning and an "Invalid argument" error stopping the program. See below for the valgrind output: ==6928== Coregrind, a rudimentary error detector for x86-linux. ==6928== Copyright (C) 2002-2004, and GNU GPL'd, by Nicholas Nethercote. ==6928== Using valgrind-2.2.0, a program supervision framework for x86-linux. ==6928== Copyright (C) 2000-2004, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. ==6928== For more details, rerun with: -v ==6928== shmat 0: addr=... ==6928== Warning: client syscall shmat tried to modify addresses 0xB0000000-0xB0010000 shmat @ top: Invalid argument ==6928== ==6928== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0) Note that I'm running Suse-9.1. Does this problem sound familiar to anyone? (I think this might look like http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79282 but that should have already been solved I think). Best regards, Jeroen Janssen |
|
From: Tom H. <th...@cy...> - 2004-11-11 11:18:58
|
In message <e34...@ma...>
Jeroen Janssen <jer...@gm...> wrote:
> ==6928== Coregrind, a rudimentary error detector for x86-linux.
> ==6928== Copyright (C) 2002-2004, and GNU GPL'd, by Nicholas Nethercote.
> ==6928== Using valgrind-2.2.0, a program supervision framework for x86-linux.
> ==6928== Copyright (C) 2000-2004, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
> ==6928== For more details, rerun with: -v
> ==6928==
> shmat 0: addr=...
> ==6928== Warning: client syscall shmat tried to modify addresses
> 0xB0000000-0xB0010000
> shmat @ top: Invalid argument
> ==6928==
> ==6928== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)
You're trying to attach a shared memory segment at an address that is
in the part of the address space that valgrind reserves to itself. This
won't work.
> Does this problem sound familiar to anyone? (I think this might look
> like http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79282 but that should have
> already been solved I think).
It is the same as that bug, but that bug is not solved as such - it
was closed as INVALID because there is nothing we can do.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (th...@cy...)
Software Engineer, Cyberscience Corporation
http://www.cyberscience.com/
|