This does not make any sense to me because it would be a heap violation, not a stack smash.
Matt On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > [I don't know the correct fix for this - but ] The following change is > getting rid of valgrind messages for me. Maybe you can use this, build > sowing separately - and continue.. > > Satish > > ---------- > > diff -r dbe25084c0e4 src/bfort/bfort.c > --- a/src/bfort/bfort.c Mon Dec 15 22:20:58 2008 -0600 > +++ b/src/bfort/bfort.c Mon Dec 21 16:29:09 2009 -0600 > @@ -2157,7 +2157,7 @@ > > /* Current token is name */ > arg->has_star = (nstar > 0); > - arg->name = (char *)MALLOC( strlen(p) + 1 ); > + arg->name = (char *)MALLOC( strlen(p) + 10 ); > strcpy( arg->name, p ); > > /* We can't output the name just yet, because if it is > > > > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, Matthew Knepley wrote: > > > The problem appears to be in OutputRoutine() in bfort.c, but that code is > > impossible > > to debug. I can't see where something is getting overwritten, and it > looks > > like the check > > only happens when the routine returns. bfort is such crap. > > > > Matt > > > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> > wrote: > > > > > >> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, Lisandro Dalc?n wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > It says there is a stack smash and no other info. This is > completely > > >> fucking > > >> > > my development right now. > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > Any chance bfort was built with -fstack-protector flag? This failure > > >> > could could be signaling an actual old bug in bfort... I would > > >> > re-build bfort with debug and re-run under valgrind... > > >> > > >> That must be it. > > >> > > >> I just ran my build [which is without -fstack-protector] - and > > >> valgrind does flag a bunch of things with bfort. > > >> > > > > > > 1) That flag is nowhere in my build. > > > > > > 2) Something changed > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > >> I normally install sowing separately and have it in my PATH - so that > > >> it doesn't have to be rebuilt each time I build petsc. > > >> > > >> I guess we should sync up [our patches] with latest sowing and make > > >> sure its valgrind clean aswell. > > >> > > >> Satish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their > > > experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which > their > > > experiments lead. > > > -- Norbert Wiener > > > > > > > > > > > > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20091221/b26302e4/attachment.html>
