similar to: Valgrind

Hi all, I have just received the following e-mail from an Asterisk user: "I just made a call via BT to a mobile. Then an incoming call came in and Ann else answered it - it made my call go completely fuzzy and I could hear what the woman on the other line was saying to Ann but I couldn't hear my conversation! When Ann's call finished - mine went even fuzzier and all I could hear

On 12/2/18 10:39 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > By default valgrind suppresses many leaks. I'm not even sure exactly > how it decides which ones to suppress, but certainly global variables > pointing to malloc’d data are suppressed, which is not useful > behaviour. Here's my understanding of why that is the default - if you assign malloc()d storage into a global, then that

Hi, Is there going to be a 1.5.1 release anytime soon? Seems like there have been enough changes in SVN to warrant one and I prefer to use only "released" code in production. It gives me warmer, fuzzier feelings than using svn/trunk. :) Regards, Dan This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this

As part of a project to clarify what behaviour of C implementations is actually relied upon in modern practice, and what behaviour is guaranteed by current mainstream implementations, we recently distributed a survey of 15 questions about C, https://goo.gl/AZXH3S. We were asking what C is in current mainstream practice: the behaviour that programmers assume they can rely on, the behaviour

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Silva" <chisophugis at gmail.com> > To: "Peter Sewell" <Peter.Sewell at cl.cam.ac.uk> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 4:53:30 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] C as used/implemented in practice: analysis of responses > > > > All of these seem to fall into the pattern of

Thanks for looking over this, Mark! I'm travelling this week but when I'm back I'll address all of your concerns and send,out another patch. :) On Jun 7, 2017 9:56 AM, "Mark Harris" <mark.hsj at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Drew Allen <bitllama at google.com> wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > Attached is the initial

Hi, I spent a little bit of time trying to debug a segfault in rsync 2.5.0, and after discovering it was in loadparm.c, I noticed that the bug had been worked around in the current CVS by removing a free() statement. That fix seems less than optimal; here's a patch which should fix the memory leak. -------------- next part -------------- --- loadparm.c.~1.40.~ Sun Dec 2 03:16:15 2001 +++

This email isn't really LLVM specific, but is definately useful for LLVM people so.... I've downloaded and installed "valgrind" (http://developer.kde.org/~sewardj/), an open source "purify" replacement. It is actually quite a bit nicer than purify is, as it doesn't require you to recompile or modify your executables _at all_ to run them (it also seems quite fast).

apologies, this is the correct patch I meant to send: On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 9:19 AM Drew Allen <bitllama at google.com> wrote: > Thanks again Mark for taking a look and pointing out the issues that > previous patch had. I've addressed your concerns. The tests should no > longer give any warnings or errors regarding usage or c89. I've ensured the > memory issues have

On 18/10/2017 11:40 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On 18 Oct 2017, at 6.34, Reuben Farrelly <reuben-dovecot at reub.net> wrote: >> >> I haven't been tracking dovecot-2.3 until now, but I've just given it a quick run, and there are a few things that may need some attention. >> >> /usr/include/features.h:376:4: warning: #warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires compiling

On 12/3/18 12:55 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 12/2/18 10:39 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> By default valgrind suppresses many leaks.  I'm not even sure exactly >> how it decides which ones to suppress, but certainly global variables >> pointing to malloc’d data are suppressed, which is not useful >> behaviour. > > >> +include

Hello all, Attached is the initial proposed implementation for ch.mapping 253/3, based on the IETF proposal: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-codec-ambisonics-03 A brief overview of the patch, as it is slightly lengthy: After discussion with Jean-Marc, we determined that ch.253/3 will need the demixing matrix as part of the encoder/decoder struct stack and thus will require a new

I'm writing a PAM module to do authentication through Signal (as in Open Whisper Systems) [1]. I would like to be able to offer (Public key AND Signal) or (Password AND Signal) for authentication. This suggests setting AuthenticationMethods to publickey,keyboard-interactive:pam password,keyboard-interactive:pam However, when PAM is enabled "password" means "show password

Hello, quoted patch free's cipher_data malloc'd in calls to EVP_CipherInit() in ssh1_3des_init(), at least linked with openssl >= 0.9.7. It does not appear to me (superficial scan) that there is any harm in calling the _cleanup routine with earlier openssl. fwiw :laird --- openssh-3.7.1p2/cipher-3des1.c Tue Sep 23 05:24:21 2003 +++ src37m/cipher-3des1.c Mon Dec 15

p/t_strdup_until wasn't returning a terminated string: Index: src/lib/strfuncs.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/cvs/dovecot/src/lib/strfuncs.c,v retrieving revision 1.41 diff -u -p -r1.41 strfuncs.c --- src/lib/strfuncs.c 18 Jul 2004 01:44:59 -0000 1.41 +++ src/lib/strfuncs.c 31 Jul 2004 08:43:35 -0000 @@ -154,6 +154,7 @@ char

There's a big thread about filesystems on postfix-users@postfix.org Could you shed some light on that issue? ----- Forwarded message from Wietse Venema <wietse@porcupine.org> ----- From: wietse@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 07:53:26 -0500 (EST) To: Lawrence Greenfield <leg+@andrew.cmu.edu> Cc: Wietse Venema <wietse@porcupine.org>,

I've been thinking of adding an instruction, and I'm following the advice in the docs to consult the list before doing something rash. What I want to do is provide a way to identify variable names and source locations that doesn't affect the effectiveness of optimizations. This is not the same problem as supporting debug info, because I don't care about being able to look up

The following code using OpenMP pragmas , when compiled with gcc 4.5 + LLVM 2.8 + DragonEgg 2.8 and ran, produces segmentation fault. //----------------------------------------------------------- #define LOOPCOUNT 10000 int main() { int bit_and = 1; int logics[LOOPCOUNT]; int i; for (i = 0; i < LOOPCOUNT; ++i) { logics[i] = 1; } #pragma omp parallel for schedule(dynamic,1)

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Peter Sewell <Peter.Sewell at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On 30 June 2015 at 18:21, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Sean Silva" <chisophugis at gmail.com> > >> To: "Peter Sewell" <Peter.Sewell at cl.cam.ac.uk> > >> Cc: llvmdev at

Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes: > On Nov 16, 2016, at 9:46 PM, Justin Bogner via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> In MemoryBuffer::init, we have an assert that reads the memory at >> `BufEnd`, which is one past the end of some memory region: >> >> from lib/Support/MemoryBuffer.cpp:45: >>> void