From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chip Coldwell Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: dumping bug explained? Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <87k5v2l0uh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87lkfikzpt.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4651CB78.2040402@redhat.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1179768046 24085 80.91.229.12 (21 May 2007 17:20:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 17:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Jakub Jelinek , Andreas Schwab , Chong Yidong , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ulrich Drepper Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 21 19:20:42 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HqBYg-0008J9-Oi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 19:20:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HqBYf-0005Q0-Rc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HqBYb-0005Mm-9w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:29 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HqBYZ-0005Ma-Qv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HqBYZ-0005MX-Le for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HqBYX-0004cG-Ee; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:25 -0400 Original-Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4LHKOsi022398; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.boston.redhat.com (mail.boston.redhat.com [172.16.76.12]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4LHKNmR025717; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:23 -0400 Original-Received: from bogart.boston.redhat.com (bogart.boston.redhat.com [172.16.80.240]) by mail.boston.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4LHKNIo005822; Mon, 21 May 2007 13:20:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4651CB78.2040402@redhat.com> X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:71530 Archived-At: On Mon, 21 May 2007, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > Chong Yidong wrote: > > Do you know if Emacs will still need to be patched after these changes > > to glibc are done? > > Not all the symptoms described in the bug can be explained by the > changes. It might very well be that changes are needed. I don't know if this is the behavior you are thinking about, but IIUC this message *** glibc detected *** emacs: malloc(): memory corruption: 0x0000000002904d10 *** was generated by an assert failing in malloc that Jakub Jelinek described in his libc-hacker posting containing his patch to solve this problem thus "removes a bogus assert mp_.n_mmaps <= mp_.n_mmaps_max." This would be the assert that would succeed if you dumped emacs with MALLOC_MMAP_MAX_=0, right? Chip -- Charles M. "Chip" Coldwell Senior Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc 978-392-2426