On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 01:37:54PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 08:02:34AM +0200, Clément Bœsch wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 09, 2017 at 11:10:16PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > > [...] > > > > is this a regression ? > > > > > > Fate didn't always complain about this, so it's either something > > > introduced by a change in our tree, or a valgrind bug introduced in a > > > relatively recent version. > > > > > > > > The reports in > > > http://fate.ffmpeg.org/history.cgi?slot=x86_64-archlinux-gcc-valgrindundef > > > are kinda broken and report a nonsense commit as the "last known good > > > ref", so i can't say when it started failing. > > > > That was because I couldn't upgrade for a long time and bumped both GCC > > and Valgrind (and actually the whole system) at once. Sorry, I couldn't do > > it gradually. > > does your fate client have optimizations enabled ? > i dont see them being disabled, and iam not sure valgrind + full > compiler optimizations are a good idea > > if they are enabled, please try to disable them to check if that > causes the false positives >
Yeah actually, only --extra-cflags=-fno-tree-vectorize is needed to make fate-vsynth3-svq1 pass. I thought it was supposed to be disabled? > my local valgrind shows nothing for svq1 With aed84ee4d reverted? --toolchain=valgrind-memcheck --disable-stripping? -- Clément B.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
