From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Anand Mohanadoss Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#19180: vacuum_weak_hash_table error Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:13:25 +0530 Message-ID: References: <87ppc78dry.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2f956e7454f050926f46f X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1417437867 12398 80.91.229.3 (1 Dec 2014 12:44:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 12:44:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 19180@debbugs.gnu.org To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 01 13:44:18 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQKu-0004lL-Tx for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 13:44:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59817 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQKu-0001D3-IJ for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:44:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56313) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQKl-0001Cm-An for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:44:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQKg-0008Jl-FT for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:44:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:53283) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQKg-0008Ja-Bi for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:44:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQKf-0004Io-Qw for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:44:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Anand Mohanadoss Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2014 12:44:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 19180 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 19180-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B19180.141743781016481 (code B ref 19180); Mon, 01 Dec 2014 12:44:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 19180) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Dec 2014 12:43:30 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50496 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQK9-0004Hl-BJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:43:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ie0-f173.google.com ([209.85.223.173]:50162) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XvQK6-0004Hc-RZ for 19180@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:43:27 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ie0-f173.google.com with SMTP id y20so9306894ier.32 for <19180@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 04:43:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=nJSu+O7yQsCGXg15D8X7jIGKxVhthOXkFBaZukQLiKU=; b=RfCquSsI2W02hq0zXZ2CXS4hVFlO5A7GT461ji4rEsxCNYnXFh7R3ZvfEOv1J+Nmyr PKfcbRedSaF21D2YQscQxc2D2cnYhOYmGfwD3SWrlax44gthDXyAArSfRm23GqaHMdTK H4OxGViTUVLdRcnteiCMGUGOTw4qTPXoNbj1Mv5D4x+jGXX4aiaxTixUUtJ4LYuWa7P1 jLKC0iwgOa+4KqLA6jja4VSlyNMroq7M5yLRxd9UfXu1gWU1KK79Jxkl03rq167ay7mz ki6F4ARTBtf1wa+fTNmbLX+Hujly3qtzmeVUCqZZxQVF3YSy4zS5a4OmNsZ3gT/pz86r mGHQ== X-Received: by 10.43.172.6 with SMTP id nw6mr43298142icc.89.1417437805755; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 04:43:25 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.107.133.88 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Dec 2014 04:43:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87ppc78dry.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:7651 Archived-At: --001a11c2f956e7454f050926f46f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear Ludovic, Thank you very much for your help! Given that the problem happens for me only while processing huge binary files after around an hour of processing (and the problem in general is not consistent), I am not sure how to come up with a reduced test case that would still reproduce the problem. So, I would appreciate any help with that. I was also wondering that given we can reproduce the problem under a particular circumstance, if we can approach the problem from the other side - e.g. by making changes on guile side to print information on the hash table for which the assertion is failing, print stats on this hash table over a period of time, make changes to hash table code to try to resolve the problem, etc. Thanks, Anand On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 10:26 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote= : > Anand Mohanadoss skribis: > > > We have observed the following error a few times with guile 2.0.11 > (32-bit) > > on x86_64 Linux while processing large binary files (1.5GB+) and > comparing > > messages contained therein. > > > > fish: hashtab.c:137: vacuum_weak_hash_table: Assertion `removed <=3D le= n' > > failed. > > [...] > > > Given that we can consistently reproduce this problem on a particular > > system, is there something you would like us to try to find the > underlying > > cause of this problem? > > Could you try to come up with a reduced test case to reproduce the > problem? That would help find out what=E2=80=99s going on. Let us know = if you > need help to do that. > > Thanks for the report! > > Ludo=E2=80=99. > --001a11c2f956e7454f050926f46f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Ludovic,

Thank you v= ery much for your help!=C2=A0 Given that the problem happens for me only wh= ile processing huge binary files after around an hour of processing (and th= e problem in general is not consistent), I am not sure how to come up with = a reduced test case that would still reproduce the problem.=C2=A0 So, I wou= ld appreciate any help with that.

I was also wondering that gi= ven we can reproduce the problem under a particular circumstance, if we can= approach the problem from the other side - e.g. by making changes on guile= side to print information on the hash table for which the assertion is fai= ling, print stats on this hash table over a period of time, make changes to= hash table code to try to resolve the problem, etc.

Thanks,
Anand

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 10:26 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org&= gt; wrote:
Anand Mohanadoss <anand108@gmail.com> skribis:

> We have observed the following error a few times with guile 2.0.11 (32= -bit)
> on x86_64 Linux while processing large binary files (1.5GB+) and compa= ring
> messages contained therein.
>
> fish: hashtab.c:137: vacuum_weak_hash_table: Assertion `removed <= =3D len'
> failed.

[...]

> Given that we can consistently reproduce this problem on a particular<= br> > system, is there something you would like us to try to find the underl= ying
> cause of this problem?

Could you try to come up with a reduced test case to reproduce the
problem?=C2=A0 That would help find out what=E2=80=99s going on.=C2=A0 Let = us know if you
need help to do that.

Thanks for the report!

Ludo=E2=80=99.

--001a11c2f956e7454f050926f46f--