On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:40 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Miller
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:33:33 -0400 (EDT)
>
>> From: Ian Lance Taylor
>> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:31:33 -0700
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon,
From: David Miller
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:33:33 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Ian Lance Taylor
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:31:33 -0700
>
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Ian Lance Taylor
>>> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
>>>
I changed it from vec->base
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:31:33 -0700
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Ian Lance Taylor
>> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
>>
>>> I changed it from vec->base + vec->size. Now it is vec->base
>>> + size, where size is the aligned vers
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ian Lance Taylor
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
>
>> I changed it from vec->base + vec->size. Now it is vec->base
>> + size, where size is the aligned version of vec->size.
>
> It is not.
>
> You don't modify 'size' at all.
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
> I changed it from vec->base + vec->size. Now it is vec->base
> + size, where size is the aligned version of vec->size.
It is not.
You don't modify 'size' at all.
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
> Sure, if you can confirm that this patch fails, I will take another look.
It fails.
Same problem, SIGBUS.
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ian Lance Taylor
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:43:42 -0700
>
>> This patch should fix it. Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace testsuite
>> on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
>
> I can tell just by looking at your patch t
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:43:42 -0700
> This patch should fix it. Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace testsuite
> on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
I can tell just by looking at your patch that it doesn't fix the
problem.
It's "vec->base + vec->size" tha
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 10:12 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Miller
> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 00:31:27 -0400 (EDT)
>
>> The size is 24, and my patch definitely makes the crashes go away.
>>
>> It seems like a vector is being used for a mixed set of objects.
>> I'll try to figure out how tha
From: David Miller
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 00:31:27 -0400 (EDT)
> The size is 24, and my patch definitely makes the crashes go away.
>
> It seems like a vector is being used for a mixed set of objects.
> I'll try to figure out how that is happening.
Ok, the problem seems to have to do with relea
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 21:06:59 -0700
> The struct used by add_function_range is
>
> struct function_addrs
> {
> uint64_t low;
> uint64_t high;
> struct function *function;
> };
>
> So on a 32-bit system, this should have a size of 20 if uint64_t
> requires 4-byte
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:27 PM, David Miller wrote:
>
> I'm getting a SIGBUS on every backtrace libbacktrace generates
> on 32-bit sparc builds. The crashes usually happen in
> add_function_range(), where 'p' is not 8-byte aligned.
>
> It seems that the vector code doesn't take care to align the
12 matches
Mail list logo
