Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "zeroise".
2016 Sep 07
2
Test failures building RELEASE_3.9.0/final
...locate
(check_rss_limit=false, cleared=false, alignment=8, size=<optimized out>,
cache=0x2111e20 <__msan::fallback_allocator_cache>, this=0x212c9a0
<__msan::allocator>) at
../projects/compiler-rt/lib/msan/../sanitizer_common/sanitizer_allocator.h:1324
#4 __msan::MsanAllocate (zeroise=false, alignment=8, size=82,
stack=0x7fffffffcf10) at
../projects/compiler-rt/lib/msan/msan_allocator.cc:125
#5 __msan::MsanReallocate (stack=stack at entry=0x7fffffffcf10,
old_p=old_p at entry=0x0, new_size=new_size at entry=82, alignment=alignment at entry=8,
zeroise=zeroise at entry=false)...
2016 Sep 07
2
-fsanitize=memory failing on 3.9.0
...locate (check_rss_limit=false, cleared=false, alignment=8,
size=<optimized out>, cache=0x210de20
<__msan::fallback_allocator_cache>, this=0x21289a0
<__msan::allocator>)
at ../projects/compiler-rt/lib/msan/../sanitizer_common/sanitizer_allocator.h:1324
#4 __msan::MsanAllocate (zeroise=false, alignment=8, size=73,
stack=0x7fffffffcea0) at
../projects/compiler-rt/lib/msan/msan_allocator.cc:125
#5 __msan::MsanReallocate (stack=stack at entry=0x7fffffffcea0,
old_p=old_p at entry=0x0, new_size=new_size at entry=73,
alignment=alignment at entry=8, zeroise=zeroise at entry=false)...
2016 Sep 07
4
Test failures building RELEASE_3.9.0/final
I've "successfully" built 3.9.0 release but when I run "ninja check-all" I
got 208 Unexpected failures:
Expected Passes : 33997
Expected Failures : 198
Unsupported Tests : 685
Unexpected Failures: 208
Below is the log I captured running "time ninja check-all | tee
ninja-check-all.txt"
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-KTY7zi7eZHU2hGYTRtd01QZjA
2014 Jan 28
3
[PATCH] Proposal for a pacifier option with mkdiskimage
Hi,
me:
> > [mkdiskimage] -s does not prevent zeroizing on block device. Probably
> > because truncate() fails.
hpa:
> Yes, we should probably fix that. The tool was originally designed for
> images, not for hardware devices, and it doesn't make much sense to zero
> the whole hardware device like that.
Maybe for privacy reasons ?
But indeed: -s should skip zeroizing,