12 Dec
2002
12 Dec
'02
10:35 a.m.
Hooking onto mprotect(2) would probably help but it's not a 100% solution since afaics there's no system call that has to be issued when some previously executed memory is overwritten and executed again.
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
Previous text:
2002-12-12 10:35: Subject: gcc 3.2
Is there any fundamental reason for that confusion?
Pike ought to use special instructions and/or system calls to flush appropriate caches, and I don't see why valgrind couldn't detect that and do the right thing.
/ Niels Möller ()