https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398445
--- Comment #9 from Stas Sergeev <s...@list.ru> --- (In reply to Ivo Raisr from comment #6) > Yes, indeed. That's why we have syscall and ioctl wrappers in Valgrind. > They describe what the other side (kernel) expects from the buffers sent > there > and in what shape they come back with buffers received. > > It should be quite easy to extend this mechanism to an arbitrary > client-server protocol, be it via shm, sockets or any other IPC. I don't see a big use of it. Unlike the kernel ioctls, in this case users will have to create these protocol wrappers on their own for every prog. I don't think too many people would be interested in doing so. I think the mission of valgrind is to make it easier for the people to track the source of the problem. As in this case the source of the problem is valgrind itself, I think the adequate help for people would be the proper documentation. It will allow them to track the problems to valgrind instead of poking their own code in vain. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
