similar to: [LLVMdev] Debugging memory errors on linux...

I'm trying to run purify on CentOS on an Intel Pentium 4/630 processor. Purify does not like the 64bit code. Is there some way to compile and run programs so that they are only using the 32 bit model? I tried gcc -m32 but then the system libraries come up missing. Purify engine: Error: Couldn't open the file crt1.o Purify engine: Error: Couldn't open the file crti.o Purify

On Thu, 19 May 2005, Reid Spencer wrote: > I forgot to remove some crud from the configure script and it caused > some of the nightly testers to fail last night. The problem has already > been fixed. Part of the problem was that it took 2 hours to get a commit > through to CVS last night and the nightly tester had already started by > that time. Something needs to be done about the

http://developer.kde.org/~sewardj/ Valgrind is a GPL'd tool to help you find memory-management problems in your programs. When a program is run under Valgrind's supervision, all reads and writes of memory are checked, and calls to malloc/new/free/delete are intercepted. As a result, Valgrind can detect problems such as: * Use of uninitialised memory * Reading/writing memory after

yue wrote: > hi, > about [LLVMdev] another question > > thanks > > yueqiang One other thing you might want to try is to put your object tree in a directory that is *not* inside of your source tree. Currently, we don't support using separate object trees that are subdirectories of the source tree. In other words: Will work: ========== SRC_ROOT=/home/yue/llvm

Patrick Alexander Simmons wrote: > I've been attempting to write my pass (which depends on DSA and pool > allocation) against the SVN trunk of LLVM and the llvm-poolalloc > project. However, I was thinking it might be better to use the latest > stable releases of these codebases. I know that this is the 2.5 branch > for LLVM, but are there any stable releases of pool

Hi, I'm trying to run the pool allocation pass through opt, and I'm running into problems. It segfaults frequently; for example, it does this when the input is a simple Hello World program: [simmon12 at apoc testcases]$ opt -load /home/vadve/simmon12/llvm/llvm/projects/llvm-poolalloc/Debug/lib/libLLVMDataStructure.so -load

Not sure if anybody has noticed: The PoolAlloc release source code extracted from SVN won't even build. I tried it last night, on WinXP/Cygwin, for both the LLVM-2.5 release, as well as the latest LLVM, neither would build -- with compile-time errors. With that being said, I have no idea which LLVM release the current PoolAlloc trunk is checked in with. Could anybody point this out? Or, at

Patrick Alexander Simmons wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to run the pool allocation pass through opt, and I'm running > into problems. It segfaults frequently; for example, it does this when > the input is a simple Hello World program: > Can you email me the bitcode file that is causing the problem? > [simmon12 at apoc testcases]$ opt -load >

Hi, FreeBSD libc Berkeley DB can leak sensitive information to database files. The problem is that it writes uninitialized memory obtained from malloc(3) to database files. You can use this simple test program to reproduce the behavior: http://www.saunalahti.fi/~jh3/dbtest.c Run the program and see the resulting test.db file which will contain a sequence of 0xa5 bytes directly from malloc(3).

I'm trying to connect from OpenSSH clients that are version 2.5.2p2 to several different HP-UX 11.00 machines that are running 2.5.1p1, but cannot. I can, however, connect to a Linux machine running 2.5.1p1 without problem. I get this message from both a Solaris 2.7 (x86) machine and a Solaris 2.6 (SPARC) machine. >From the x86 machine, I get ssh dozer 51 f6 46 8d 9d 98 17 a6 b6 10 79

Somemore information regarding the smbstatus error. The sigbus error is occuring where I noted below. I now have data values to go along with the location. The SIGBUS generating bit is "entry_scanner_p->e.pid" which looks to be in an unaccessable area of memory. Looking back through the code, I find a couple of bizarities. For example file_scanner_p->num_share_mode_entries

Hello, we are in troubles with smbd processes which are rapidly growing in terms of memory usage. We did implement a mean that gives us ability to dynamically mount or unmount samba shares. I prepared a simple script which demonstrates this very closely. Script loops following operations: - touch samba config file to make it newer - send SIGHUP to smbd process (kill -1 <smbd_pid>) -

Hi team, I am beginning on R and I try to install Rmpi library and I have problems, I have installed LAM-MPI on Rocks; [rcnavarro at hpc-cip ~]$ laminfo LAM/MPI: 7.1.1 Prefix: /opt/lam/gnu Architecture: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Configured by: root Configured on: Wed Oct 19 18:12:25 EDT 2005 Configure host: rocks-156.sdsc.edu Memory

I am writing an interprocedural compiler pass. Because the passneeds information from a FunctionPass, e.g., the post-dominance frontier (PDF), and because a ModulePass is not permitted to require a FunctionPass, I am forced to make my pass a FunctionPass and do majority of its work in the doFinalization() method. When I run "opt -mypass -verify -o code2.bc code1.bc" I get no

I have a compiler transform that I have been working on that produces bytecode that passes the verifier. However, when I try to read that bytecode back in, I get the assertion failure below. llvm::BytecodeReader::ParseConstantPoolValue(unsigned int): Assertion `(!isa<Constant>(Result) || !cast<Constant>(Result)->isNullValue()) || !hasImplicitNull(TypeID) &&

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > I am writing an interprocedural compiler pass. Because the passneeds > information from a FunctionPass, e.g., the post-dominance frontier > (PDF), and because a ModulePass is not permitted to require a > FunctionPass, I am forced to make my pass a FunctionPass and do majority > of its work in the doFinalization() method. ok > When

Ryan, This looks like a bug. Could you file it, please? Reid. On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 19:47 -0600, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > I have a compiler transform that I have been working on that produces > bytecode that passes the verifier. However, when I try to read that > bytecode back in, I get the assertion failure below. > > llvm::BytecodeReader::ParseConstantPoolValue(unsigned

Hi, Probably some of the leaks Valgrind reports are spurious, but the numbers seem to be significant enough to demand some attention: ==10132== LEAK SUMMARY: ==10132== definitely lost: 15,624 bytes in 558 blocks. ==10132== indirectly lost: 44,548 bytes in 1,591 blocks. ==10132== possibly lost: 37,576 bytes in 98 blocks. ==10132== still reachable: 1,336,876 bytes in 1,364 blocks.

I followed what you said and called verifyModule() with the AbortProcessAction option. verifyModule() returns false, but does not abort and does not print out any information about what caused the verification to fail. Chris Lattner wrote: > On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: >> I am writing an interprocedural compiler pass. Because the passneeds >> information from a

I am still diagnosing the cause of the assertion failure and will submit a bug when I better understand the problem. Reid Spencer wrote: > Ryan, > > This looks like a bug. Could you file it, please? > > Reid. > > On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 19:47 -0600, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > >>I have a compiler transform that I have been working on that produces >>bytecode