Re: strange failures with gcc-9.0.1-0.11.fc31.x86_64

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Thu, 2019-03-28 at 14:28 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 02:14:31PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 08:52:18AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 01:55:44PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to compile systemd in koji and mock, and I'm getting suspicious
> > > > crashes...
> > > > 
> > > > $ valgrind x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/test-terminal-util
> > > > /* test_default_term_for_tty */
> > > > ...
> > > > /* test_read_one_char */
> > > > ==21== Invalid read of size 4
> > > > ==21==    at 0x48C09EC: fputs (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.29.9000.so)
> > > > ==21==    by 0x109301: UnknownInlinedFun (test-terminal-util.c:43)
> > > > ==21==    by 0x109301: main (test-terminal-util.c:80)
> > > > ==21==  Address 0x0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
> > > > ==21== 
> > > > ==21== 
> > > > ==21== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
> > > > 
> > > > The problem is at this line, there is just a call to (a function which
> > > > transitively calls) mkostemp(). It seems like the inlining is somehow
> > > > going wrong.
> > > 
> > > It turns out that our test case was wrong. I was confused because the
> > > inlining causes the backtrace to report an unrelated spot.
> > 
> > So do you still need anything from me to debug?
> 
> Thanks. I need some advice mostly. There's still the question of bogus
> backtrace returned by valgrind. Is this a valgrind issue or the debug
> data produced by gdb or something else? If we cannot rely on
> backtraces with LTO, this would be a big drawback.

The above backtrace is produced by valgrind. The addresses should be
correct, but as "UnknownInlinedFun" shows it has some trouble resolving
the associated function/symbol names.

I don't know if LTO makes that valgrind bug worse.

If gdb works then you can also use gdb and valgrind together:
https://tromey.com/blog/?p=731

http://valgrind.org/docs/manual/manual-core-adv.html#manual-core-adv.gdbserver

gdb probably can produce a better backtrace than valgrind.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux