Bug 154268 - unhandled syscall: 179
Summary: unhandled syscall: 179
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 173177
Alias: None
Product: valgrind
Classification: Developer tools
Component: memcheck (other bugs)
Version First Reported In: 3.3.0
Platform: Compiled Sources Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: blocking3.5.0
Assignee: Julian Seward
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-12-18 13:10 UTC by Volker Lendecke
Modified: 2009-06-29 09:09 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed/Implemented In:
Sentry Crash Report:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Volker Lendecke 2007-12-18 13:10:24 UTC
Running smbd under valgrind 3.3.0 on SLES10 (2.6.16.27-0.9-smp, x86_64) gives me

--31179-- WARNING: unhandled syscall: 179
--31179-- You may be able to write your own handler.
--31179-- Read the file README_MISSING_SYSCALL_OR_IOCTL.
--31179-- Nevertheless we consider this a bug.  Please report
--31179-- it at http://valgrind.org/support/bug_reports.html.

It indicates to me that I should report this here, so here we are :-)
Comment 1 Julian Seward 2007-12-18 13:19:11 UTC
Try uncommenting line 1259 of coregrind/m_syswrap/syswrap-amd64-linux.c,
make install and try again.  Does that work?  In particular, do you get
anything that looks like a false positive from Memcheck immediately after
that syscall?
Comment 2 Volker Lendecke 2007-12-18 14:10:09 UTC
Ok, this solved it for me. Thanks!

And no, I did not get any spurious memcheck message immediately after that. Just hundreds of the unhandled syscall messages, my test client does this a lot :-)

Volker
Comment 3 Nicholas Nethercote 2007-12-18 22:10:43 UTC
Reopening, because it hasn't been fixed in the repository yet, and WORKSFORME means "I can't reproduce it".
Comment 4 Volker Lendecke 2007-12-18 22:50:19 UTC
I was very surprised to see it resolved as "WORKSFORME". I as a bug reporter had just a single choice to close the bug and it ended up like this :-)

Volker

... who is on the receiving side of https://bugzilla.samba.org way too much :-))
Comment 5 Nicholas Nethercote 2009-06-29 09:09:20 UTC
Marking this as a dup of bug 173177, even though this bug is older by almost a year, because it is the same issue and is resolved and marked with the SVN commit info.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 173177 ***