On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Konstantin Serebryany <
konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Bart Van Assche <bvanass...@acm.org>wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Konstantin Serebryany <
>> konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> FYI
>>> ThreadSanitizer will not report anything on this test, even with
>>> --free-is-write (which is on by default) because this tool assumes the
>>> malloc implementation to be correct and ignores every access inside malloc
>>> and friends.
>>> I haven't seen any false positives due to --free-is-write (in
>>> ThreadSanitizer) over last ~6 months, but we found tons of real races with
>>> this flag. Just a fresh example:
>>> http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=72042
>>>
>>
>> Hello Konstantin,
>>
>> Has that --free-is-write feature already been tested in combination with
>> custom memory allocators ?
>>
> What kind of custom memory allocators?
> We regularly run it with programs linked against tcmalloc.
>
Hello Konstantin,
With "custom memory allocators" I was referring to those using the
VG_USERREQ__MALLOCLIKE_BLOCK and VG_USERREQ__FREELIKE_BLOCK client requests
and not to those that replace malloc() like e.g. tcmalloc.
Bart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources
and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's
connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these
rules translate into the virtual world?
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb
_______________________________________________
Valgrind-users mailing list
Valgrind-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-users
