From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#41321: 27.0.91; Emacs aborts due to invalid pseudovector objects Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 18:17:51 +0300 Message-ID: <837dwyvi74.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zha8cgpi.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1vibmyj.fsf@gnu.org> <83imgublku.fsf@gnu.org> <831rncjuwf.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7w5xvfa.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2phwb9x.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1v9w9vi.fsf@gnu.org> <83mu5xw50d.fsf@gnu.org> <83k110wxte.fsf@gnu.org> <4bab5f55-95fe-cf34-e490-1d4319728395@cs.ucla.edu> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="40000"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 41321@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, pipcet@gmail.com To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue May 26 17:19:12 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbMF-000AGm-IH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 17:19:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59674 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbME-00059s-I6 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:19:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46646) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbM6-00058c-Tu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:34555) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbM6-00047t-Ko for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbM6-00034s-HY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:19:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 15:19:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41321 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 41321-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41321.159050629311772 (code B ref 41321); Tue, 26 May 2020 15:19:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 41321) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 May 2020 15:18:13 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46101 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbLI-00033o-LC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:18:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39082) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbLG-00033b-KW for 41321@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:18:11 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45957) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbLA-0003nZ-Gl; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:18:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2169 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbL9-0001zf-PU; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:18:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Paul Eggert on Mon, 25 May 2020 23:46:02 -0700) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:181040 Archived-At: > From: Paul Eggert > Cc: 41321@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier > Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 23:46:02 -0700 > > I propose the second patch for emacs-27; it's limited to what you proposed, > namely, it weakens maybe_lisp_pointer to check only for GC_ALIGNMENT. > > static bool > maybe_lisp_pointer (void *p) > { > - return (uintptr_t) p % LISP_ALIGNMENT == 0; > + return (uintptr_t) p % GCALIGNMENT == 0; > } On non-USE_LSB_TAG systems, GCALIGNMENT is 1, so this doesn't look right (or maybe I'm missing something).