Unfortunately this commit breaks my build and executable. FC 18. --enable-debug 
and --enable-wccp.

Building:

    autoreconf -i

fails. 

[amc@yuna ats]$ autoreconf -i
configure.ac:1115: warning: AC_LANG_CONFTEST: no AC_LANG_SOURCE call detected 
in body
../../lib/autoconf/lang.m4:194: AC_LANG_CONFTEST is expanded from...
../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2730: _AC_RUN_IFELSE is expanded from...
../../lib/m4sugar/m4sh.m4:606: AS_IF is expanded from...
../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2749: AC_RUN_IFELSE is expanded from...
configure.ac:1115: the top level
configure.ac:1115: warning: AC_LANG_CONFTEST: no AC_LANG_SOURCE call detected 
in body

When I tried to run it with just a normal rebuild (I tried autoreconf in case 
there was a configuration problem), I get

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0x7ffff67fc700 (LWP 14023)]
0x00007ffff7dd5a35 in ink_atomic_cas<__int128> (mem=0x7ffff6d05288, 
    prev=0x00000000000000000000000000000001, 
    next=0x000000000000000000007fffe0015dc1) at ink_atomic.h:153
153       return __sync_bool_compare_and_swap(mem, prev, next);
(gdb) up
#1  0x00007ffff7dd57b9 in ink_atomiclist_push (l=0x7ffff6d05288, 
    item=0x7fffe0015dc0) at ink_queue.cc:481
481            result = ink_atomic_cas((__int128_t*) & l->head, head.data, 
item_pair.data);
(gdb) up
#2  0x00000000006c62e9 in AtomicSLL<UnixNetVConnection, 
UnixNetVConnection::Link_read_enable_link>::push (this=0x7ffff6d05288, 
c=0x7fffe0015dc0)
    at ../../lib/ts/List.h:477
477       void push(C * c) { ink_atomiclist_push(&al, c); }
(gdb) up
#3  0x00000000006c40ef in UnixNetVConnection::reenable (this=0x7fffe0015dc0, 
    vio=0x7fffe0015ed0) at UnixNetVConnection.cc:721
721               nh->read_enable_list.push(this);

I don't see why it segfaults - in the debugger in frame 0 I can look at mem and 
*mem without a problem. Does the 128 int have to be naturally aligned?

Sunday, March 10, 2013, 10:46:53 AM, you wrote:

> I'm going to commit this patch today unless there are any last minute
> objections.

> Brian

Reply via email to