Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build Identifier: M20110210-1200 There are some options on the latest valgrind tools that are missing on valgrind pluging configuration interface. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: Running valgrind --tool=<memcheck, massif, cachegrind) --help will show options that are not available at valgrind configuration interfaces.
Created attachment 196029 [details] Valgrind plugin patch for massif tool. This patch adds the new options available on valgrind >= 3.6.0 for the massif tool.
Created attachment 196030 [details] Valgrind plugin patch for memcheck tool. This patch adds the new options available on valgrind >= 3.6.0 for the memcheck tool.
Thanks very much for the patches, Daniel! Since you are not a committer, patches that are > 250 lines must go through an Eclipse legal contribution questionnaire (CQ). Is there any way you can shorten the patches or split them up? If not, we can easily open a CQ and get them processed. Note that the intellectual property log (IP log) submission deadline for the Indigo release (June 2011) was today so we won't be able to include these changes in our 0.8 release (that's the release that will be a part of Indigo). Our Indigo service release 1 contribution will be able to include them.
Hi Andrew, No problem on that, you are very welcome. I think there is no problem regarding the delay for the patch inclusion. Also I am working on the patch for the cachegrind tool and probably it is a good idea to have it included upstream with those two (massif and memcheck). Regarding the patch size, I am not sure what would be best. I my opinion it would be better to open a CQ (if it is not too much trouble) and keep the patch in one functional piece. Anyway, if you think that split them would make the process easier I can work on it as well. As you prefer. Thanks for the reply.
I agree, Daniel: let's wait until we have IP approval and all the patches to apply. Don't worry about the patch size, we'll open CQs for the patches. Thanks again.
Daniel, Can you please add a statement here stating that you wrote 100% of this contribution and have the permission of your employer to contribute it under the EPL? Thanks, Andrew
Hi Andrew, I did some confusion here when I said cachegrind would need a patch too. It is already reflection the valgrind > 3.6.0 options. Sorry about that. So, those 2 patches are the only ones to be included. I wrote those two patches and the added code were 100% wrote by me. Also I have full permission from IBM to contribute with those patches under the EPL. I just need some instructions now on how to proceed with the CQs for the patchs. Regards.
Thanks, Daniel. You don't need to do anything to proceed with the CQs other than make the statement you just have. I'll let you know if the IP team requires any further input from you. Thanks very much.
Daniel, is it possible for you to publish a git repository with your changes? Something on GitHub would be nice. You can fork from here: https://github.com/eclipse/linuxtools Then, we can follow this page: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/Handling_Git_Contributions and since I just got word that the CQs have been approved, I can pull from there and then push to the canonical git.eclipse.org repo. Let me know if this won't work and we'll figure something else out. Thanks!
Hi Andrew, Here is the URL for the Pull Request: https://github.com/eclipse/linuxtools/pull/3 Thank you.
Also, the links for the commits, in case you need it. https://github.com/debonzi/linuxtools/commit/4b2668bcdb9e8667d8fddc69b631e57953b15dbd https://github.com/debonzi/linuxtools/commit/f87c50eb66c39a7dbd65e801663454c0f968911d
Thanks, Daniel! I verified that the commits were the same as what was approved by the legal team so I've merged them and pushed as these two commits: 61eb4c0d54fa650b825debf07f75429637782827 ba34c1cbd8fb91f59dd1e45928043bfa4138132c You should soon be able to see them here: http://git.eclipse.org/c/linuxtools/org.eclipse.linuxtools.git In the future you can just paste URLs here of the commit SHA-1s you'd like merged. I don't know how to clear merge requests at GitHub against the automated Eclipse mirrors that are there; can you remove them since they're now unnecessary? I also don't know how often the Eclipse repos get mirrored at GitHub.
(In reply to comment #10) > Hi Andrew, > > Here is the URL for the Pull Request: > https://github.com/eclipse/linuxtools/pull/3 > Thank you. FYI: I've added a comment on the pull requests on github mentioning that these have been pushed in order to avoid confusion :)
