[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-bugs-dist
Subject:    [valgrind] [Bug 376257] helgrind history full speed up using a cached stack
From:       Philippe Waroquiers <bugzilla_noreply () kde ! org>
Date:       2017-11-02 20:43:42
Message-ID: bug-376257-17878-MqwVyA5szr () http ! bugs ! kde ! org/
[Download RAW message or body]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=376257

Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|CONFIRMED                   |RESOLVED

--- Comment #8 from Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be> ---
(In reply to Julian Seward from comment #7)
> Philippe, thanks for having the patience (and finding a way!) to redo this
> without changing Vex.  This looks good to me.  Just a few minor comments.

Thanks for the review and comments. I have handled all of them (details below),
and commited the result as 619fb35df7b3fba514da7298c8b428d1ec490f93


> 
> +   /* Take into account the first_ip_delta and first_sp_delta. */
>     startRegs.r_pc += (Long)(Word)first_ip_delta;
> +   startRegs.r_sp += (Long)first_sp_delta;
> 
> You might as well remove the (Word) cast for the r_pc line, since it's
> redundant.
(Word) removed.

> 
> 
> +            if (fixupSP_needed) {
> +               hName = "evh__mem_help_cwrite_4_fixupSP";
> +               hAddr = &evh__mem_help_cwrite_4_fixupSP;
> +            } else {
> +               hName = "evh__mem_help_cwrite_4";
> +               hAddr = &evh__mem_help_cwrite_4;
> +            }
> 
> Please add a short comment somewhere, explaining the difference
> between (eg) evh__mem_help_cwrite_4_fixupSP and evh__mem_help_cwrite_4.
I have added short comments in the above 'if', and in the functions
evh__mem_help_cwrite_4_fixupSP and evh__mem_help_cwrite_8_fixupSP

> 
> 
> +               the SP needed to unwind need to be fixed UP.
> 
> Did you mean "UP" and not "up"?
Typo, changed to up.

> 
> 
> +static Bool check_cached_rcec_ok (Thr* thr, Addr previous_frame0)
> +{
> 
> Is this just for debugging, or is it used in "normal" runs?  If it
> is for normal runs, is it safe -- meaning, can it cause the run to
> fail if some of the heuristics it uses are not quite right?
> 
> If it is just for debugging (which I am hoping), please add a comment to say
> that.
I have added a comment indicating that this is for debuggging only (activated
by
--hg-sanity-flags.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.=
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]