On Sun Feb 24 21:54:31 2008, petergibbs wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Will Coleda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Perl6 Internals" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 4:00 AM > Subject: Re: [perl #51136] [BUG] Segfault in Parrot_Ref_morph > > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Peter Gibbs via RT > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> "Will Coleda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > >> > As of r26037, tcl is once again generating a segfault (even on > >> > feather!). The change in 26037 was to replace a morph + assign > >> with > >> > the 'copy' opcode. > >> > >> This is indeed a problem caused by the copy op. > >> > >> As a workaround for now, I suggest commenting out the call to > >> VTABLE_destroy, which will cause memory leaks but not segfaults. I > >> will work > >> on a proper solution later tonight if nobody beats me to it. > > > > This does let that tcl test pass again. Thanks for the tip. I may go > > ahead and remove that with a comment pointing to this ticket in the > > next day or so if you don't commit a fix. > > > > Thanks. > > > >> Regards > >> Peter Gibbs > > -- > > Will "Coke" Coleda > > > I have done some work on resolving the consequences of the destroy, by > guarding the object method dispatch code against a missing object, but > have not yet committed it as it still does not resolve all the problems. > The current implementation of the copy op, by doing a clone followed by > a memmove, causes some sort of GC corruption, with some classes. For > example, String and TclString seem to be okay, but TclList (which > extends ResizablePMCArray) causes problems. I have to do some work for > paying clients today and tomorrow, but I will try to find some time to > continue tracking this issue. > > Regards > Peter Gibbs >
This segfault is no longer present in the PDD17 branch; we can close this ticket out after the merge back to trunk.
