From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Vivek Dasmohapatra Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#26932: 25.1; Crash triggered a few times a day with network process Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 14:48:40 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <83bmqu7rdd.fsf@gnu.org> <83h8zl5mag.fsf@gnu.org> <831sqp5hn3.fsf@gnu.org> <83zidd4196.fsf@gnu.org> <83bmpr4z7s.fsf@gnu.org> <8337b34qnw.fsf@gnu.org> <83zidb2t9o.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1497534558 10964 195.159.176.226 (15 Jun 2017 13:49:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:49:18 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Cc: 26932@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 15 15:49:13 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV96-0002Ok-Vr for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:49:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54163 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV99-0007Bw-07 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:49:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55348) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV92-0007Bn-8d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:49:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV8w-0007R9-5Y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:49:08 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:46008) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV8w-0007R3-1O for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:49:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV8v-0006Ci-KV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:49:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Vivek Dasmohapatra Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:49:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 26932 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 26932-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B26932.149753453223832 (code B ref 26932); Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:49:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 26932) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jun 2017 13:48:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48685 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV8m-0006CK-JD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:48:52 -0400 Original-Received: from ceres.etla.org ([85.119.82.193]:56228) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV8l-0006CB-Bh for 26932@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:48:51 -0400 Original-Received: from platypus.pepperfish.net ([2a01:4f8:201:620f::2001]) by ceres.etla.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dLV7y-0004s2-Hz; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 14:48:02 +0100 X-X-Sender: vivek@platypus.pepperfish.net In-Reply-To: <83zidb2t9o.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam_score: -3.0 X-Spam_score_int: -29 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "ceres.etla.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Wed, 14 Jun 2017, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > One thing to try is to rebuild Emacs without optimizations (-O0 > compiler option). I'll kick off a build, but from experience that seems to help a lot less these days - AIUI anything left in a register over a function call still counts as optimised away, and you have to crack out the disassembly instructions in gdb to see it. I'm guessing amd64 having a lot more registers makes this more obvious than in the old i386 register-starved days. [...] Content analysis details: (-3.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule na X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:133615 Archived-At: On Wed, 14 Jun 2017, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > One thing to try is to rebuild Emacs without optimizations (-O0 > compiler option). I'll kick off a build, but from experience that seems to help a lot less these days - AIUI anything left in a register over a function call still counts as optimised away, and you have to crack out the disassembly instructions in gdb to see it. I'm guessing amd64 having a lot more registers makes this more obvious than in the old i386 register-starved days. > Thank you. Let me know if you need help in that. Looks reasonable enough. Is there anything in particular you're interested in, other than which object triggered the SEGV?