From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: allocate_string_data memory corruption Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 14:57:35 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87vewha2zl.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87d5in9cop.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1137873736 9416 80.91.229.2 (21 Jan 2006 20:02:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 20:02:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 21 21:02:15 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F0Ow8-0001Ip-Uz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:02:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F0Oyg-0005oI-QX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:04:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F0OxU-0005lf-Qd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:03:37 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F0OxT-0005l7-Q9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:03:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F0OxS-0005kx-VX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:03:35 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1F0P1u-0007oa-7R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:08:10 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1F0Orf-0000ro-B6; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 14:57:35 -0500 Original-To: Chong Yidong In-reply-to: <87d5in9cop.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (message from Chong Yidong on Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:49:42 -0500) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:49361 Archived-At: > I think instead they should be disallowed in signal handlers. > And AFAIK they are disallowed. But it's quite possible that some signal > handler does it, even though it's disallowed. Why, is there any disadvantage to using BLOCK_INPUT in allocate_string and Fcons? It seems like a more robust solution than checking individual signal handlers to make sure they behave properly. Either approach can work. If we've been using the solution of not allocating Lisp objects in the signal handlers, let's stick with that for the time being. In any case please do try the debugging statement that Stefan suggested, so we can see if this is indeed the cause of the problem. And it would be good to install that debugging statement permanently, for as long as we still use this design.