From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Clemente Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#71274: 30.0.50; assertion failed: w->window_end_valid, in find_first_unchanged_at_end_row Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 12:39:39 +0000 Message-ID: References: <86le3rr0lm.fsf@gnu.org> <86plt2p762.fsf@gnu.org> <86a5k1lwpr.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="15541"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 71274@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 06 14:42:14 2024 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 1sFCRZ-0003u4-UY for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 14:42:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sFCRB-0004Vj-BZ; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:41:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sFCR9-0004UY-NM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:41:47 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sFCR9-0002et-FE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:41:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sFCRN-0002la-Iy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:42:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Daniel Clemente Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 12:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 71274 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 71274-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B71274.171767769110594 (code B ref 71274); Thu, 06 Jun 2024 12:42:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 71274) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jun 2024 12:41:31 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52660 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sFCQt-0002ko-Cg for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:41:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ua1-f42.google.com ([209.85.222.42]:49448) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sFCQq-0002kV-O7 for 71274@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 08:41:30 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ua1-f42.google.com with SMTP id a1e0cc1a2514c-80ad2893ae5so267197241.3 for <71274@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 05:41:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1717677608; x=1718282408; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=WXhOn5PwvZnnVEX6g2VJVmGtfhbp5Uxk/AfhKUZCdEE=; b=OQdVM/jMCzYMvvHX2xWlBIlHG8AK3FF36mOrG7bE7dEROqFptJzJnUGVA+xU8qeVCu kfaOcqfRyR9drnIMDlqcRZkSPzvXz2EJ+S2DU2mz9aiBHlJO6NK3UVmd9RhlbLJZDxqt 7FkhwTch4Kv9dLElGqPfkiP266YGV49AC8hm9WRr4quKzFlxCZlY2W8S6yVXNza0DP/L Gqk8sVxHzDGhzdOfWV8paziQutfyNlTCs59mIM+lEzXRemdCiTGFedMk7VGU+BPIl97r +uhVUazrqxw3eeEx+4Idpe5kByGk8kxMInTdZYNOapbuT8vrgLVm7EoKjg9PJLMg84PG sRdg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1717677608; x=1718282408; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WXhOn5PwvZnnVEX6g2VJVmGtfhbp5Uxk/AfhKUZCdEE=; b=HW9IGg916LPPR9QXkUKbbiGA5n5cacq68mLp0bjp/stMgHHYxAjZu/t8v3TywWFMLF tRi1WXYKiphyffpZ334NqG6g7zwncfKkbkDfkLrZ98VL7pCt/wYbo352e6Y0gFH57CiT kBrgc5hV6wDIwabKoS3syUclG5GXVSzhwtSBIxvBZK7zdksTCa6SICnxMLsrFmAdqesa AT6XgMaf8CvFnN5+PfEC1U0Ev6aEs4PMNV1AiglulRX8vlhW4YN9nEYKE0wGwkzpyhoJ w9NczHBFcrrvRho+EhyJgmIYzYhoZoRUpyv/FVQ/8EOQnnUyWmjw82A/k20jpFrS5Z1a JjSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwisagcyugmaRZy+N5x++7rJyeWPxz36lanoq+daUH85JR8ELQR VyfykrK/Sgr5GCJzmPW3AL33oVGxtAURkfXXT7rlG4kmoDksNkj2Q7eFqnHQQ9PdsHXoQjgMxZt QQDaMgmGKurgUrYAaQwnafF122uKCYA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFrDYFMD5W1fCZO1KVzM2ty43iHs3FvLVweFhaOdwiHl1HsZITKRHQFrEEcLjcowAaFLSraM9iHh/ES5RHn34s= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:18c3:b0:47e:f4cf:841f with SMTP id ada2fe7eead31-48c0481ba93mr5731693137.4.1717677608347; Thu, 06 Jun 2024 05:40:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <86a5k1lwpr.fsf@gnu.org> 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:286694 Archived-At: Thanks, well, I'm not seeing these errors anymore. I don't have a formula to reproduce the bug, but I trust the patch will help and this bug can be closed. I don't much knowledge about try_window_id. Could this change create new situations in which a window isn't fully redisplayed but it should? I saw a redisplay issue after resizing the window (mangled text) but I don't think it's related to this bug because I placed a breakpoint on your new code and it didn't run. I posted some details at 71289. On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 at 18:15, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Daniel Clemente > > Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:50:47 +0000 > > Cc: 71274@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > > Thanks, but please find where it changes inside the call to > > > init_to_row_end, because I couldn't see anything obvious in the code > > > involved in that call. There's some factor at work here that we need > > > to identify and understand. > > > > It happens (window_end_valid becoming false) inside init_iterator, in > > init_from_display_pos (called init_to_row_end). Here: > > > > /* Keep in mind: the call to reseat in init_iterator skips invisible > > text, so we might end up at a position different from POS. This > > is only a problem when POS is a row start after a newline and an > > overlay starts there with an after-string, and the overlay has an > > invisible property. Since we don't skip invisible text in > > display_line and elsewhere immediately after consuming the > > newline before the row start, such a POS will not be in a string, > > but the call to init_iterator below will move us to the > > after-string. */ > > init_iterator (it, w, charpos, bytepos, NULL, DEFAULT_FACE_ID); > > > > > > Inside init_iterator, window_end_valid becomes false during this code > > (i.e. it was true just before, and false just after): > > > > /* If face attributes have been changed since the last redisplay, > > free realized faces now because they depend on face definitions > > that might have changed. Don't free faces while there might be > > desired matrices pending which reference these faces. */ > > if (!inhibit_free_realized_faces) > > { > > if (face_change) > > { > > face_change =3D false; > > XFRAME (w->frame)->face_change =3D 0; > > free_all_realized_faces (Qnil); > > } > > else if (XFRAME (w->frame)->face_change) > > { > > XFRAME (w->frame)->face_change =3D 0; > > free_all_realized_faces (w->frame); > > } > > } > > > > I don't know yet which branch runs or what happens inside > > free_all_realized_faces, since I didn't see this crash recently. > > > > Does this give any hint about how window_end_valid could become false? > > Yes, it does, thanks. I installed a fix which hopefully plugs this. > > > In next tests I'll run with the latest git version, including your > > recent commit eb9afd558ec (which I know is for something different > > =E2=80=94SIGWINCH=E2=80=94 but who knows, maybe it was related to this = bug). > > I don't think so.