From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MPS: unable to build due to assertion violation in igc_dump_check_object_starts Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 14:42:05 +0000 Message-ID: References: <861q3k9sfb.fsf@gnu.org> <86zfq889re.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="11857"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= , eller.helmut@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 23 16:52:42 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1sWGsc-0002qk-4L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 16:52:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sWGs0-0008QQ-1L; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:52:04 -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 1sWGig-0005Jg-KT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:42:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-4316.protonmail.ch ([185.70.43.16]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sWGie-00046a-70; Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:42:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1721745733; x=1722004933; bh=bjHKxlDkYomPyy8wxbW+OypwMI40x49EJ9nQuxbNdcU=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=KbyLAqGMmPiVs/Bh3d/8+l0JKyjYAXocTISLgzArBECFLDGNtMqTC5u2TcT03Fvip LRpIC5ynaC4aCKpfM8BUBnNPEjom1NMZhPr2eHHFZKf7OAAkt5X6cdTQ5+mJnsMnyP XZjGy83UtnQtbM5H3NLea0gMhLvZMJtxL8KT16uqL2U28MioQpUXIeEIwyRlQZuzFg 3qul426rcUS//zSWJd2ZBFW9qUrMYNbA6HhS0/HSuyqXg47YRYt0Xvjb9pczt+84Iy K3o1xE/3JnLFTY2DGD3boCuCAvl2yrRBkNSLkJ88R7F0A9lVds2VRTNRdx/5ZtLmWH 0Q8mtuQNJTOEQ== In-Reply-To: <86zfq889re.fsf@gnu.org> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 5e2bfe25638243899e1b011229408e482098af6c Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.43.16; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-4316.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 10:52:00 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:321993 Archived-At: On Tuesday, July 23rd, 2024 at 14:26, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Gerd M=C3=B6llmann gerd.moellmann@gmail.com >=20 > > Cc: Pip Cet pipcet@protonmail.com, Helmut Eller eller.helmut@gmail.com, > > emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 16:10:42 +0200 > >=20 > > Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org writes: > >=20 > > > So it looks like dflt_skip(0x1b26ac70) yields some bogus value, but I > > > have no idea what it means or where to look to find the reason(s). > >=20 > > This function checks the consistency of the pdump when it is written. I= t > > should be the case that the two regions of the dump (hot and cold) > > contain igc_headers that correspond to the relocs that the pdump > > contains. > >=20 > > With i =3D=3D 1 we are currently in the cold region. It should be the c= ase > > that the igc_headers contained in the cold region are traversable in th= e > > same way as if the objects in the region had been allocated from MPS. > > That is, we start at the start of the regioni with the first objects, > > then dftl_skip from there we reach the second object, dflt_skip from > > there takes us to the third object and so on. > >=20 > > In the failing case, dflt_skip from p does not take us to the next > > object, as far as the relocs say, So either the igc_header at p is > > somehow wrong or the reloc entry from relocs is wrong. > >=20 > > Maybe one can see from the igc_header at p what object type was dumped > > there? There should be some 32-bit dependency somewhwere since I don't > > see that here on 64 bits. >=20 > I don't really understand what I'm doing, but does the below help? That looks very helpful indeed. Thanks for testing this, I need to get a mi= ngw development environment somehow... > Thread 1 hit Breakpoint 1, emacs_abort () at w32fns.c:11335 > 11335 { > (gdb) up > #1 0x00eb5540 in terminate_due_to_signal (sig=3Dsig@entry=3D22, > backtrace_limit=3Dbacktrace_limit@entry=3D2147483647) at emacs.c:470 > 470 emacs_raise (sig); > (gdb) > #2 0x00f2a81a in die (msg=3D0x14f8051 "end =3D=3D p", >=20 > file=3D0x14f79c8 "igc.c", line=3D4820) at alloc.c:8400 >=20 > 8400 terminate_due_to_signal (SIGABRT, INT_MAX); > (gdb) > #3 0x00fee189 in igc_dump_check_object_starts (relocs=3D0x11d32853, > dump_base=3D0x1aa41020, hot_start=3D0x1aa41098, hot_end=3D0x1b055c70, > cold_start=3D0x1b081020, heap_end=3D0x1b1f9e98) at igc.c:4820 > 4820 eassert (end =3D=3D p); > (gdb) p obj_size(start) > $1 =3D 801749580 > (gdb) p igc_header_nwords(start) > $2 =3D 200437395 > (gdb) p header_tag(start) > $3 =3D 0 > (gdb) p header_nwords(start) > $4 =3D 200437395 > (gdb) p *(struct igc_header *)start > $5 =3D {v =3D 1721744118644157000} > (gdb) p/x *(struct igc_header *)start > $6 =3D {v =3D 0x17e4dd2759e72a48} > (gdb) p relocs > $7 =3D (Lisp_Object) 0x11d32853 > (gdb) source .gdbinit > SIGINT is used by the debugger. > Are you sure you want to change it? (y or n) [answered Y; input not from = terminal] > Environment variable "DISPLAY" not defined. > Environment variable "TERM" not defined. > Breakpoint 2 at 0xeb54e0: file emacs.c, line 432. > (gdb) p relocs > $8 =3D XIL(0x11d32853) > (gdb) xtype > Lisp_Cons > (gdb) xcar > $9 =3D 0x11a5eda3 > (gdb) xtype > Lisp_Cons > (gdb) xcar > $10 =3D 0x1b9b062 > (gdb) xtype > Lisp_Int0 > (gdb) xint > $11 =3D 7236632 > (gdb) p r > $12 =3D XIL(0x11a5ed33) > (gdb) xtype > Lisp_Cons > (gdb) xcar > $13 =3D 0x1b9b022 > (gdb) xtype > Lisp_Int0 > (gdb) xint > $14 =3D 7236616 > (gdb) pp r > (7236616 7236632) >=20 > So relocs seem to be pairs of numbers, and 'r', the one that seems to > cause the problem, looks okay to me. But is the igc_header okay? Definitely not. No valid igc_header is divisible by four. > Let me know if I can collect more data. Will do once I have an idea. Thanks again, and sorry for the trouble. Pip