[petsc-dev] Valgrind report a bug in PetscOptionsFindPair_Private

[Éric Chamberland]

Barry,

sorry for the delay... but your patch solved the problem!

thanks!

Eric

Le 18-06-21 à 16:12, Smith, Barry F. a écrit :
>     Fixed in barry/fix-petscstrlcat/maint
>
>     I also doubled the length of the work strings used in processing options so your options won't get truncated and hence not get processed properly.
>
>      Barry
>
>
>> On Jun 20, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Eric Chamberland <Eric.Chamberland at giref.ulaval.ca> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> since we recently upgraded our nighlty valgrind validations to PETSc 3.9.2, valgrind found a bug in PetscOptionsFindPair_Private, called from:
>>
>> PetscOptionsHasName("M_AssembleurGD_H_/pmi/cmpbib/compilation_BIB_gcc_valgrind/COMPILE_AUTO/BIBTestValidation/Ressources/opt/Test.assemblageDynamique/Ressources.Lettre_C_2016_gsf_P2B5_Z450_mp/Lettre_C_2016_gsf_P2B5_Z450_mp_A_SolveurLin_pour_solveur_","-::GIREF_NOM_PREFIXE_OPTIONS_PETSC");
>>
>> valgrind complains with:
>>
>> ==253393== Source and destination overlap in strncat(0x1ffeff62e0, 0x1ffeff6299, 108)
>> ==253393==    at 0x4C2C976: strncat (vg_replace_strmem.c:348)
>> ==253393==    by 0x1522912F: PetscStrlcat (str.c:460)
>> ==253393==    by 0x151DE08A: PetscOptionsFindPair_Private (options.c:1361)
>> ==253393==    by 0x151DF153: PetscOptionsHasName (options.c:1502)
>> ...
>>
>> We noticed that the PETSc code has changed close from there, so maybe it is related?
>>
>> We do not have the bug with Petsc versions: {3.5.3,3.8.3} that we used to tests with valgrind.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Eric