From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30696 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2014 17:05:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 30686 invoked by uid 89); 11 Feb 2014 17:04:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:04:59 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s1BH4uTM016016 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:04:56 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-148.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.148]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s1BH4s0F014451 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:04:55 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Florian Weimer Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: How important is mcheck? References: <52F8F53C.8090708@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:05:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <52F8F53C.8090708@redhat.com> (Florian Weimer's message of "Mon, 10 Feb 2014 16:50:20 +0100") Message-ID: <87d2itwpft.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00029.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Florian" == Florian Weimer writes: Florian> I see two bug reports about issues discovered with mcheck, so maybe it Florian> is useful. Florian> Could you move mcheck in-tree? mcheck's been discussed a few times on the gdb lists (I forget which) in the past; and also at least once on the glibc list. Some nice things about mcheck are that it is low cost and easy to enable by default for development builds; since many developers are on glibc-based systems, it can help catch simpler bugs. As you found it caught a few in the past. I suppose we could have main call mcheck. That seems only mildly more difficult. Florian> Then you'd be able to enable it regardless of Python threading Florian> support. The problem is that mcheck is written in a way that inherently not thread-safe. This requires a fix in glibc. Tom