Suppression can't really help with this - even if you can stop one or
two complaints the undefined bits tend to propagate through the
encryption state and hence to everything encrypted or decrypted using
the state that is (partially) derived from the undefined data.
Tom
On 30/08/17 16:51, Dominik Straßer wrote:
Hi Julian,
similar to my answer to John:
why isn't suppression working here ?
Regards
Dominik
Am 30.08.2017 um 17:32 schrieb Julian Seward:
As these seem OK to me (cryprography intentionally works with
uninitialized values) I would like to suppress them.
Another thing you could consider doing, if you really have to use undefined
values, is to figure out where they come from (heap or stack allocation,
use --track-origins) and then add a VALGRIND_MAKE_DEFINED (or whatever it is
called) client request. This lies to Memcheck, claiming the inputs are
defined when they are not really. But at least it will not complain about
undefinedness from them alone, after that.
See <valgrind/memcheck.h>.
J
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Valgrind-users mailing list
Valgrind-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-users
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Valgrind-users mailing list
Valgrind-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-users
