On 7/2/2015 8:20 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jul 2 14:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jul 1 22:10, Ken Brown wrote:
I may have spoken too soon. As I repeat the experiment on a different
computer, with a build from a slightly different snapshot of the emacs
trunk, emacs crashes when I type 'C-x d' with the following stack dump:
Stack trace:
Frame Function Args
00100A3E240 00180071CC3 (00000829630, 000008296D0, 00000000000, 0000082CE00)
00030000002 001800732BE (00000000000, 00000000002, 00100A48C80, 00000000002)
00000000000 00000006B40 (00000000002, 00100A48C80, 00000000002, 00100A48768)
00000000000 21000000003 (00000000002, 00100A48C80, 00000000002, 00100A48768)
End of stack trace
$ addr2line 00180071CC3 -e /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/cygwin1.dbg
/usr/src/debug/cygwin-2.1.0-0.3/winsup/cygwin/exception.h:175
$ addr2line 001800732BE -e /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/cygwin1.dbg
/usr/src/debug/cygwin-2.1.0-0.3/winsup/cygwin/exceptions.cc:1639
That points to a crash while setting up the alternate stack. This is
always a possibility because, in contrast to the kernel signal handler
in a real POSIX system, the Cygwin exception handler is still running on
the stack which triggered the crash up to the point where we call the
signal handler function. Dependent on how the stack overflow occured,
this additional stack usage may be enough to kill the process for good.
Out of curiosity, can you add this to the init_sigsegv() function:
#include <windows.h>
[...]
init_sigsegv (void)
{
[...]
SetThreadStackGuarantee (65536);
Of course this only works "per thread", so if init_sigsegv is called
for the main thread, only the main thread gets this treatment. For
testing this should be enough, though.
That didn't make any difference. But I do have a little more information. I
tried running emacs under gdb with a breakpoint at handle_sigsegv. The
breakpoint is hit when I deliberately trigger the stack overflow. Then I
continue, emacs says it has recovered from the stack overflow, and I type 'C-x
d'. At this point there's a second SIGSEGV and handle_sigsegv is called again.
But this time garbage collection is in progress, and handle_sigsegv just gives up.
I don't know what caused the second SIGSEGV but I'll try to figure that out when
I next have a chance to look at this. I also don't know why the stack dump
pointed to a crash while setting up the alternate stack, since the fatal crash
actually seems to have happened later. But maybe the stack was just completely
messed up after the second SIGSEGV and the stack dump can't be trusted.
More later.
Ken
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
