This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH v2] ftell: seek to end only when there are unflushed bytes (BZ #17647)

On 04-12-2014 13:58, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 12/04/2014 08:16 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>>         ftell: fdopen (file, "a+"): old offset = 0, new offset = 30, offset after EOF = 36
>>         ftell: fopen (file, "(null)"): 
>> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
>> _IO_new_file_fopen (fp=0x212a2620, filename=0x212a0010 "/tmp/tst-active-handler-tmp.oSQlBj", mode=0x0, is32not64=1) at fileops.c:261
>> 261       switch (*mode)
>> (gdb) bt
>> #0  _IO_new_file_fopen (fp=0x212a2620, filename=0x212a0010 "/tmp/tst-active-handler-tmp.oSQlBj", mode=0x0, is32not64=1) at fileops.c:261
>> #1  0x00003fffb7e7ee7c in __fopen_internal (filename=0x212a0010 "/tmp/tst-active-handler-tmp.oSQlBj", mode=0x0, is32=<optimized out>) at iofopen.c:86
>> #2  0x00003fffb7e7ef14 in _IO_new_fopen (filename=<optimized out>, mode=<optimized out>) at iofopen.c:97
>> #3  0x0000000010001f88 in ?? ()
>> #4  0x000000001000323c in ?? ()
>> #5  0x000000001000180c in ?? ()
>> #6  0x00003fffb7e2436c in generic_start_main (main=0x10015178, argc=<optimized out>, argv=0x3fffffffeb30, auxvec=0x3fffffffece0, init=<optimized out>, rtld_fini=<optimized out>, 
>>     stack_end=<optimized out>, fini=<optimized out>) at ../csu/libc-start.c:289
>> #7  0x00003fffb7e24594 in __libc_start_main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>, ev=<optimized out>, auxvec=<optimized out>, rtld_fini=<optimized out>, stinfo=<optimized out>, 
>>     stack_on_entry=<optimized out>) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/libc-start.c:80
>> #8  0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>> GLIBC built with GCC 4.9.3 / -O3 (I have not tested different compiler/flags). I tried to
>> debug a little and seems the test_modes is bogus somehow.  The testcase also fails running
>> on system GLIBC (2.17/FC19 in my environment).
> We would have seen this in our internal ppc/ppc64 builds, but we didn't
> which means it is likely compiler dependent.
> I assume that when you say FC19 you still mean a ppc64 FC19? Similar
> compiler issue?
> I've kicked off a ppc64le build of master to see what I can see.

I also thinks it is a codegen issue I am seeing, although valgrind did not report
any meaningful issue besides the invalid memory access itself. I will check more

> Cheers,
> Carlos.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]