From: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
To: John Reiser <jreiser@BitWagon.com>
Cc: Steve VanDeBogart <vandebo-lkml@NerdBox.Net>,
jiayingz@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, dkegel@google.com
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 2/6] UML: Don't valgrind userspace
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 18:12:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080906221231.GA9359@c2.user-mode-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48C2EE46.2060509@BitWagon.com>
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 01:55:34PM -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> > This is effectively appropriating part of the kernel's ABI for
> > valgrind's use.
>
> UML is part of the kernel, so getting a memory reference checker (valgrind)
> running in UML is part of the kernel, too. The concept of "escape from the
> virtualizer" eventually occurs to more than just memory reference checkers.
Irrelevant - what if UML, or anything else for that matter, starts
using CLONE_IO? All of a sudden, valgrind will start letting those
threads go.
> Why wouldn't that be a race between the next _NR_clone from this thread
> and the next _NR_clone from any other existing thread [in the same
> process]?
Yeah, if you cloned in a signal handler, that would be a problem.
How about sticking the annotation in the thread itself? This may be
what you're suggesting here - I can't really tell.
> Valgrind can pre-pend a block of code at the start of the new thread,
> but almost immediately that code will want to "unvirtualize."
> Doing so at _NR_clone itself is convenient all around.
Jeff
--
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-06 22:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-29 23:12 [PATCH 0/6] support valgrinding uml Steve VanDeBogart
2008-08-29 23:14 ` [PATCH 1/6] base: Valgrind headers and Kconfig Steve VanDeBogart
2008-09-01 9:32 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-01 14:06 ` Jeff Dike
2008-09-01 14:22 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-01 15:47 ` Jeff Dike
2008-08-29 23:15 ` [PATCH 2/6] UML: Don't valgrind userspace Steve VanDeBogart
2008-09-05 16:37 ` [uml-devel] " Jeff Dike
2008-09-06 20:55 ` John Reiser
2008-09-06 22:12 ` Jeff Dike [this message]
2008-08-29 23:16 ` [PATCH 3/6] UML and sched: Annotate stacks Steve VanDeBogart
2008-08-29 23:16 ` [PATCH 4/6] VM: Annotate pagealloc Steve VanDeBogart
2008-08-30 10:57 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-09-03 5:25 ` [uml-devel] " Steve VanDeBogart
2008-09-03 9:35 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-29 23:17 ` [PATCH 5/6] slab: Annotate slab Steve VanDeBogart
2008-08-30 10:50 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-09-03 2:54 ` [uml-devel] " John Reiser
2008-09-03 9:39 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-09-03 5:08 ` Steve VanDeBogart
2008-09-03 9:27 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-09-03 9:40 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-09-03 15:42 ` Steve VanDeBogart
2008-09-04 7:33 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-29 23:18 ` [PATCH 6/6] VM: Annotate vmalloc Steve VanDeBogart
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080906221231.GA9359@c2.user-mode-linux.org \
--to=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=dkegel@google.com \
--cc=jiayingz@google.com \
--cc=jreiser@BitWagon.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=vandebo-lkml@NerdBox.Net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox