Hello All
(Sorry for such a basic question; very probably there are some GDB tricks
that I ignore).
In my MELT branch I have now some corrputed memory (maybe because I am
inserting a pass at the wrong place in the pass tree). At some point, I call
bb_debug, and it crashes because the field bb_nex
On 02/04/2011 07:42 AM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> An obvious strategy is to use the hardware watchpoint feature of GDB.
> However, one cannot nicely put a watchpoint on an address which is not
> mmap-ed yet.
I typically find the location at which the object containing the address
is allocated.
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
> In my MELT branch I have now some corrputed memory (maybe because I am
> inserting a pass at the wrong place in the pass tree). At some point, I call
> bb_debug, and it crashes because the field bb_next contains 0x101 (which is
> not a valid adress).
>
> So I need t
Quoting Basile Starynkevitch :
Hello All
(Sorry for such a basic question; very probably there are some GDB tricks
that I ignore).
In my MELT branch I have now some corrputed memory (maybe because I am
inserting a pass at the wrong place in the pass tree). At some point, I call
bb_debug, and i
2011/2/4 Basile Starynkevitch :
> An obvious strategy is to use the hardware watchpoint feature of GDB.
> However, one cannot nicely put a watchpoint on an address which is not
> mmap-ed yet.
Actually, you can do this with a recent enough GDB (7.1 AFAIK). It
will keep watchpoint disabled until the
This merge brings all the integration patches. I've also created
a ChangeLog.google-main to separate the changes from both
branches.
Tested on x86_64.
Diego.
> "Basile" == Basile Starynkevitch writes:
Basile> So I need to understand who is writing the 0x101 in that field.
valgrind can sometimes catch this, assuming that the write is an invalid
one.
Basile> An obvious strategy is to use the hardware watchpoint feature of GDB.
Basile> However, one
Quoting Tom Tromey :
"Basile" == Basile Starynkevitch writes:
Basile> So I need to understand who is writing the 0x101 in that field.
One thing to watch out for is that the memory can be recycled. I've
been very confused whenever I've forgotten this. I have a hack for the
GC (appended -
While doing the integration->main merge today, I realized that I
misnamed the ChangeLog.google files. If both branches name them
the same, merges will be ugly and we won't be able to tell them
apart easily.
I renamed all the existing ChangeLog.google to
ChangeLog.google-integration. We'll have a
