From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: allocate_string_data memory corruption Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:48:58 -0500 Message-ID: <871wz5f66t.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: <87vewha2zl.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1137632366 19311 80.91.229.2 (19 Jan 2006 00:59:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:59:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 19 01:59:24 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 1EzO90-00016p-5R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:59:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EzO9A-00080v-8R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:59:28 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EzN4X-0002Fe-CG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:50:37 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EzN4V-0002Ep-N9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:50:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EzN4U-0002EF-OA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:50:35 -0500 Original-Received: from [18.19.6.82] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EzN8P-0006mG-71; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:54:37 -0500 Original-Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3BE8A1208EA; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:48:58 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Eli Zaretskii In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:06:25 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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:49246 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Are you in fact 110% sure the abort happens on the second debugging > check? Can you tell how did you verify this? (The line number shown > by GDB is not a reliable evidence.) > > Was this code compiled without optimizations? If not, recompile with > "-O0" and see if you get abort or crash in another place. I'll double-check with the user, but I believe it was compiled with -O0. We had to move the check around in that function while we were narrowing down where the memory corruption occurs, and the line number reported by GDB seemed to be correct. > Btw, does the value of `data' itself change in any way? You didn't > show its value at the offending line. `data' is just a variable, stored on the stack, that points to the next free region of memory in current_sblock (b->next_free). I haven't considered the possibility that `data' itself could have changed. I'll look into it.