From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Tue Jan 10 19:42:26 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6A09CAA770 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:42:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5C9B1F8E for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:42:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v0AJgQg0070912 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:42:26 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 213778] stable/11 -r307797 on BPi-M3 (cortex-a7): truss gets segmentation fault for handling SIGSYS Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:42:26 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: markmi@dsl-only.net X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 19:42:26 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D213778 --- Comment #3 from Mark Millard --- (In reply to Mark Millard from comment #2) The attribution to clang 3.8.0 for the original problem was wrong: It was a SSD bit corruption instead. While the linked output was wrong the original .o from clang was correct. (I noticed this long ago but forgot to note it here at the time.) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=