From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Valgrind patches for hypercalls
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 10:55:04 +0000
Message-ID: <529C6708.1060309@citrix.com>
References: <1385665021-5392-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
	<1385725511.25763.31.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
	<1385980654.7108.33.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
	<529C6515.3080408@citrix.com>
	<1385981364.7108.39.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1385981364.7108.39.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 02/12/13 10:49, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 10:46 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 02/12/13 10:37, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2013-11-29 at 11:45 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 18:56 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>> This set of patches teaches valgrind about new hypercalls.
>>>>>
>>>>> Valgrind can now completely inspect xc_domain_save()/restore()
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>>>>> CC: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
>>>> Thanks, these look OK to me on a quick skim and build so I've sent them
>>>> upstream to: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328205
>>> Which has just resulted in them being applied, thanks to Bart Van
>>> Assche.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ian.
>>>
>>>
>> Wow - that was quick going.
> Yes!
>
>> I wonder how well valgrind now does with xl create...
> It used to work for me, that's what I was doing when I first implemented
> this stuff.
>
> IIRC it doesn't play especially well with the deaemonisation aspect for
> some reason, but you can keep it in the foreground and/or disable the
> monitoring bit (both on the cmdline) and it works ok, for at least bog
> standard PV and HVM guests.
>
> That was then of course.
>
> Ian.
>

Sadly, its the daemonisation aspect which is the interesting one to look
at.  Memory leaks in the daemon are far more critical than in the
short-lived runs.

~Andrew