You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Haven't seen this on x86, but it may be because the memcpy is being optimized away and hidden from valgrind, but on ppcel64 I see the following errors in valgrind. The various rust-lightning and C bits on the outside shouldn't be relevant, ultimately we call SharedSecret::new with two safely-constructed objects. Note that this is built against the HEAD of pull #279 though that shouldn't be related either.
==525== at 0x487F4D4: memcpy (vg_replace_strmem.c:1034)
==525== by 0x514D023: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ge_neg (group_impl.h:84)
==525== by 0x5151FBF: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ecmult_const (ecmult_const_impl.h:242)
==525== by 0x515D00F: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ecdh (main_impl.h:53)
==525== by 0x5091ECF: secp256k1::ecdh::SharedSecret::new (ecdh.rs:108)
==525== by 0x5096C37: lightning::ln::peer_channel_encryptor::PeerChannelEncryptor::outbound_noise_act (peer_channel_encryptor.rs:192)
==525== by 0x5041B9F: lightning::ln::peer_channel_encryptor::PeerChannelEncryptor::get_act_one (peer_channel_encryptor.rs:248)
==525== by 0x4E9F69F: lightning::ln::peer_handler::PeerManager<Descriptor,CM,RM,L>::new_outbound_connection (peer_handler.rs:464)
==525== by 0x4FCFD3B: PeerManager_new_outbound_connection (peer_handler.rs:751)
==525== by 0x114E83: PeersConnection::PeersConnection(LDK::ChannelManager&, LDK::ChannelManager&, LDK::PeerManager&, LDK::PeerManager&) (demo.cpp:261)
==525== by 0x10DDAF: main (demo.cpp:406)
==525==
==525== Source and destination overlap in memcpy(0x1ffeffc808, 0x1ffeffc808, 88)
==525== at 0x487F4D4: memcpy (vg_replace_strmem.c:1034)
==525== by 0x514D023: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ge_neg (group_impl.h:84)
==525== by 0x5152007: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ecmult_const (ecmult_const_impl.h:247)
==525== by 0x515D00F: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ecdh (main_impl.h:53)
==525== by 0x5091ECF: secp256k1::ecdh::SharedSecret::new (ecdh.rs:108)
==525== by 0x5096C37: lightning::ln::peer_channel_encryptor::PeerChannelEncryptor::outbound_noise_act (peer_channel_encryptor.rs:192)
==525== by 0x5041B9F: lightning::ln::peer_channel_encryptor::PeerChannelEncryptor::get_act_one (peer_channel_encryptor.rs:248)
==525== by 0x4E9F69F: lightning::ln::peer_handler::PeerManager<Descriptor,CM,RM,L>::new_outbound_connection (peer_handler.rs:464)
==525== by 0x4FCFD3B: PeerManager_new_outbound_connection (peer_handler.rs:751)
==525== by 0x114E83: PeersConnection::PeersConnection(LDK::ChannelManager&, LDK::ChannelManager&, LDK::PeerManager&, LDK::PeerManager&) (demo.cpp:261)
==525== by 0x10DDAF: main (demo.cpp:406)
==525==
==525== Source and destination overlap in memcpy(0x1ffeffc808, 0x1ffeffc808, 88)
==525== at 0x487F4D4: memcpy (vg_replace_strmem.c:1034)
==525== by 0x514F84F: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ge_mul_lambda (group_impl.h:654)
==525== by 0x515201B: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ecmult_const (ecmult_const_impl.h:248)
==525== by 0x515D00F: rustsecp256k1_v0_4_0_ecdh (main_impl.h:53)
==525== by 0x5091ECF: secp256k1::ecdh::SharedSecret::new (ecdh.rs:108)
==525== by 0x5096C37: lightning::ln::peer_channel_encryptor::PeerChannelEncryptor::outbound_noise_act (peer_channel_encryptor.rs:192)
==525== by 0x5041B9F: lightning::ln::peer_channel_encryptor::PeerChannelEncryptor::get_act_one (peer_channel_encryptor.rs:248)
==525== by 0x4E9F69F: lightning::ln::peer_handler::PeerManager<Descriptor,CM,RM,L>::new_outbound_connection (peer_handler.rs:464)
==525== by 0x4FCFD3B: PeerManager_new_outbound_connection (peer_handler.rs:751)
==525== by 0x114E83: PeersConnection::PeersConnection(LDK::ChannelManager&, LDK::ChannelManager&, LDK::PeerManager&, LDK::PeerManager&) (demo.cpp:261)
==525== by 0x10DDAF: main (demo.cpp:406)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Haven't seen this on x86, but it may be because the
memcpy
is being optimized away and hidden from valgrind, but on ppcel64 I see the following errors in valgrind. The various rust-lightning and C bits on the outside shouldn't be relevant, ultimately we callSharedSecret::new
with two safely-constructed objects. Note that this is built against the HEAD of pull #279 though that shouldn't be related either.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: