On 2017-10-06 11:20:05 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > While running valgrind on latest HEAD (suppression list included), I > am seeing complains with epoll_pwait() on Linux: > ==12692== Syscall param epoll_pwait(sigmask) points to unaddressable byte(s) > ==12692== at 0x62F72D0: epoll_pwait (in /usr/lib/libc-2.26.so) > ==12692== by 0x5D819C: WaitEventSetWaitBlock (latch.c:1048) > ==12692== by 0x5D8060: WaitEventSetWait (latch.c:1000) > ==12692== by 0x5D774D: WaitLatchOrSocket (latch.c:385) > ==12692== by 0x5D7619: WaitLatch (latch.c:339) > ==12692== by 0x582E57: ApplyLauncherMain (launcher.c:976) > ==12692== by 0x550BA7: StartBackgroundWorker (bgworker.c:841) > ==12692== by 0x5658BC: do_start_bgworker (postmaster.c:5693) > ==12692== by 0x565C37: maybe_start_bgworkers (postmaster.c:5897) > ==12692== by 0x5620FC: reaper (postmaster.c:2887) > ==12692== by 0x4E4AD9F: ??? (in /usr/lib/libpthread-2.26.so) > ==12692== by 0x62EEAA6: select (in /usr/lib/libc-2.26.so) > ==12692== Address 0x0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd > > I have not looked at that very closely, but this does not look normal, > hence this post.
I think this might be more a valgrind bug than anything. Note the "sigmask points to to unaddressable byte" and "Address 0x0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd" bits. It's valid to pass a NULL sigmask argument. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers