#11 Stack trace showing source location but not function name

[Christoph Schwarz]

Stack traces sometimes show source location but not function name. I would assume that if the location in the source file is known then the function name is known as well. Looks like a problem with parsing debug information, see [#1]. In addition, the source file location is incorrect, there are stack frames missing and some extra stack frames that can not be right.

To reproduce:

coregrind\valgrind.exe memcheck\tests\windows\memcheck-x86-windows.exe

Actual output:

...
Test read-after-free 1
==7920== Invalid read of size 1
==7920==    at 0x70301CD8: strlen (mc_replace_strmem.c:482)
==7920==    by 0x41FFE98: ???
==7920==    by 0x402830: ??? (memcheck.c:23)
==7920==    by 0x4013EA: __tmainCRTStartup (crtexe.c:309)
==7920==    by 0x41FFFCC: ???
==7920==  Address 0x4201240 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 32 free'd
==7920==    at 0x703012B8: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:456)
...

Expected output:

...
Test read-after-free 1
==7920== Invalid read of size 1
==7920==    at 0x70301CD8: strlen (mc_replace_strmem.c:482)
==7920==    by 0x402830: test_read_after_free_1 (memcheck.c:17)
==7920==    by 0x40XXXX: main (memcheck.c:88)
==7920==    by 0x4013EA: __tmainCRTStartup (crtexe.c:309)
==7920==    by 0x41FFFCC: ???
==7920==  Address 0x4201240 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 32 free'd
==7920==    at 0x703012B8: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:456)
...

[Christoph Schwarz]

• Description has changed:

Diff:

--- old
+++ new
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-Stack traces sometimes show source location but not function name. I would assume that if the location in the source file is known then the function name is known as well. Looks like a problem with parsing debug information, see [#1].
+Stack traces sometimes show source location but not function name. I would assume that if the location in the source file is known then the function name is known as well. Looks like a problem with parsing debug information, see [#1]. In addition, the source file location is incorrect, there are stack frames missing and some extra stack frames that can not be right.

 To reproduce:

@@ -24,8 +24,8 @@
     Test read-after-free 1
     ==7920== Invalid read of size 1
     ==7920==    at 0x70301CD8: strlen (mc_replace_strmem.c:482)
-    ==7920==    by 0x41FFE98: ???
-    ==7920==    by 0x402830: test_read_after_free_2 (memcheck.c:23)
+    ==7920==    by 0x402830: test_read_after_free_1 (memcheck.c:17)
+    ==7920==    by 0x40XXXX: main (memcheck.c:88)
     ==7920==    by 0x4013EA: __tmainCRTStartup (crtexe.c:309)
     ==7920==    by 0x41FFFCC: ???
     ==7920==  Address 0x4201240 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 32 free'd