[Mono-bugs] [Bug 60576][Maj] Changed - Bad interaction - Mono, Gentoo (nptl) & Muine

[bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.ximian.com]

Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the
URL shown below and enter your comments there.

Changed by latexer@gentoo.org.

http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=60576

--- shadow/60576	2004-06-22 17:27:12.000000000 -0400
+++ shadow/60576.tmp.21364	2004-06-30 20:22:42.000000000 -0400
@@ -10,13 +10,13 @@
 Component: misc
 AssignedTo: mono-bugs@ximian.com                            
 ReportedBy: richard.torkar@htu.se               
 QAContact: mono-bugs@ximian.com
 TargetMilestone: ---
 URL: 
-Cc: foser@gentoo.org,gabor@z10n.net
+Cc: foser@gentoo.org,gabor@z10n.net,latexer@gentoo.org
 Summary: Bad interaction - Mono, Gentoo (nptl) & Muine
 
 Software where the bt is from:
 kernel 2.6.7
 glibc-2.3.3.20040420
 mono-0.96
@@ -189,6 +189,77 @@
 #91 0x4007117a in mono_get_lmf_addr () at mini.c:6492
 Previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)
 #0  0xffffe410 in ?? ()
 *****************************************************************
 
 Thanx for all the help Paolo.
+
+------- Additional Comments From latexer@gentoo.org  2004-06-30 20:22 -------
+I know this must be relatively low priority for the ximian/novell
+folks, but there's new backtraces posted to the gentoo bug linked to
+from the original bug report. Of note is that the problem did *not*
+exist in beta1. From beta1 -> beta2 there was the change  in the GC to
+the latest boehm, iirc. As muine (and blam which has problems as well)
+both behave when GC_DONT_GC=1 is exported, this is clearly (to me) a
+GC problem related to the change in GC from beta1 -> beta2.
+
+With muine hanging, i get the following from the two threads:
+#0  0xffffe410 in ?? ()
+#1  0xbfffe854 in ?? ()
+#2  0x40d07100 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
+#3  0x00000008 in ?? ()
+#4  0x40c27eff in sigsuspend () from /lib/libc.so.6
+#5  0x4013494c in GC_end_blocking () from /usr/lib/libmono.so.0
+#6  <signal handler called>
+#7  0xffffe410 in ?? ()
+#8  0xbfffebc8 in ?? ()
+#9  0x00000031 in ?? ()
+
+and
+#0  0xffffe410 in ?? ()
+#1  0xbfffe728 in ?? ()
+#2  0xffffffff in ?? ()
+#3  0x00000003 in ?? ()
+#4  0x40ca6d89 in poll () from /lib/libc.so.6
+#5  0x401d0022 in g_main_loop_get_context () from
+/usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
+#6  0x0805ce00 in ?? ()
+#7  0x00000003 in ?? ()
+#8  0xffffffff in ?? ()
+#9  0x401cee6f in g_main_context_query () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
+#10 0x00000003 in ?? ()
+#11 0x00000003 in ?? ()
+#12 0x0805ce00 in ?? ()
+#13 0x401cf52f in g_main_context_dispatch () from
+/usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
+#14 0x08053030 in ?? ()
+#15 0xffffffff in ?? ()
+#16 0x7fffffff in ?? ()
+#17 0x0805ce00 in ?? ()
+#18 0x00000003 in ?? ()
+#19 0x08053030 in ?? ()
+#20 0xbfffe878 in ?? ()
+#21 0x401a29bf in ?? () from /usr/lib/libgthread-2.0.so.0
+
+The first one seems to be the one of interest, and it matches a
+backtrace from someone on the gentoo bug.
+
+When getting my hang in blam, the one thread yeilds the same trace:
+(gdb) where
+#0  0xffffe410 in ?? ()
+#1  0xbfffe844 in ?? ()
+#2  0x40d07100 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
+#3  0x00000008 in ?? ()
+#4  0x40c27eff in sigsuspend () from /lib/libc.so.6
+#5  0x4013494c in GC_end_blocking () from /usr/lib/libmono.so.0
+#6  <signal handler called>
+#7  0xffffe410 in ?? ()
+#8  0xbfffebb8 in ?? ()
+#9  0x0000008b in ?? ()
+
+and then the same for the other thread. Clearly this seems to be the
+trouble area.
+
+I'm also not really sure where to start with regards to a simple test
+case that causes this. If someone wants to point me in the right
+direction, i'll be more than happy to try to get something that
+pinpoints the failure.