Re: The magazine_chain_pop_head() problem
- From: Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>
- To: Yann Droneaud <yann droneaud fr>
- Cc: Mark Ellis <mark mpellis org uk>, gtk-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: The magazine_chain_pop_head() problem
- Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 10:55:08 +0000
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 11:35 +0100, Yann Droneaud wrote:
> Le mercredi 08 décembre 2010 à 09:58 +0000, Bastien Nocera a écrit :
> > On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 08:48 +0100, Yann Droneaud wrote:
> > > (I've already send this message, but it seems it was lost in moderation)
> > <snip>
> > > So I'm stuck.
> > >
> > > If this bug could not be reproduced for debug, debug support should be added/enabled in the code
> > > to try to discover the culprit. Any ideas ? ;)
> >
> > It's possible the slice allocator has bugs, but the more probable reason
> > for those crashes is memory corruption and double-frees in the affected
> > code. Each bug should be treated as separate ones until root-caused.
> >
>
> So, you think running programs with G_SLICE=always-malloc (under
> valgrind) will uncover the real bugs ?
>
> Or will it hide them ?
It depends whether the bugs are in the slice allocator or the programs
themselves. As I'm pretty sure the problems are in the programs, it
wouldn't hide them.
> Enabling G_SLICE=always-malloc fully bypass the multi-threaded slice
> allocator code, so if the problem is lying on a corner case of the
> thread access, we're going to miss it.
Right, but you'd need to come up with more than circumspect evidence
that the bug lies in the slice allocator though.
> So I'm currently running my desktop with G_SLICE=debug-blocks, at least
> it could detect double free, but not memory overflow.
Cheers
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]