Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 11:33:31 +0100 From: Vlad Galu <dudu@dudu.ro> To: Barbara <barbara.xxx1975@libero.it> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libstc++ (?) problem on CURRENT? Message-ID: <AANLkTiko%2BK5jDqM=rZRg7nFA-yFKUAtpgL2UKmsoYRDe@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <13873405.926621289039480757.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> References: <13873405.926621289039480757.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Barbara <barbara.xxx1975@libero.it> wrote: > > >>On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Barbara <barbara.xxx1975@libero.it> wrot= e: >>> >>> I had a problem running the IcedTea java plugin on CURRENT i386, while = it >>> works on 8_STABLE. >>> But maybe it's not a problem related to the port. >>> Just to be clear, I'm not looking for a solution about the port here, I= 'm > just >>> wondering why the same c++ code is working on 8_STABLE and it's segfaul= ting > on >>> CURRENT, considering also that AFAIK the gcc version in both the base > systems >>> is the same. >>> >>> In the part of the code causing the crash, a std::map is read with an > iterator >>> in a for loop, and if a condition is met, an entry is erased. >>> The following is the bt I'm getting: >>> #0 =A00x29e36247 in kill () from /lib/libc.so.7 >>> #1 =A00x29e361a6 in raise () from /lib/libc.so.7 >>> #2 =A00x282424f6 in XRE_LockProfileDirectory () from >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0/usr/local/lib/firefox3/libxul.so >>> #3 =A0<signal handler called> >>> #4 =A00x29c8f1b2 in std::_Rb_tree_increment () from >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0/usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 #5 =A00x2ef92402 in >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0IcedTeaPluginUtilities::invalidateInstance () from >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0/usr/local/openjdk6/jre/lib/IcedTeaPlugin.so >>> ... >>> >>> I wrote a "patch" for the IcedTea plugin, replacing the for loop with a > while >>> and increasing the iterator before erasing from the map, and it seems > working. >>> Then I wrote a simple program that do something similar to IcedTea, so > there >>> is no need to build the whole java/openjdk6 port to do some testing. >>> Running it on 8_STABLE it works, on CURRENT it crashes. >>> You can find more details in this discussion on the freebsd-java ml: >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-java/2010-November/008978.ht= ml >>> >>> You can find the patch and the sample code in the discussion above, any= way > I'm >>> reporting them here too: >>> icedtea patch: >>> http://pastebin.com/b2KKFNSG >>> test case: >>> http://pastebin.com/Amk4UJ0g >> >>You appear to invalidate the iterator inside the loop and then >>increment it. Do the following: >> >>-- cut here -- >>for (iter =3D cars.begin(); iter !=3D cars.end(); ) { >> if ((*iter).second =3D=3D modelName) >> =A0cars.erase(iter++); >> else >> =A0++iter; >>} >>-- and here -- >> >>In this example, you first increment the iterator and then erase its >>previous value. >> > > So there is a bug in my source code! Well, I'm not surprised. > > I'm trying to report the code in icedtea here, extracting it from the pat= ch so > I hope it's accurate enough: > > =A0 =A0std::map<void*,NPP>::iterator iterator; > =A0 =A0for (iterator =3D instance_map->begin(); iterator !=3D instance_ma= p->end(); > iterator++) > =A0 =A0{ > =A0 =A0 =A0if ((*iterator).second =3D=3D instance) > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0{ > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 instance_map->erase((*iterator).first); > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0} > =A0 =A0 } > > So, do you think, like Ed Schouten said, that there is a bug in the sourc= e > code but it's just exposed on CURRENT? > Is that code bad too? > > Thanks > Barbara > > Yes, I believe CURRENT's malloc zeroes out the memory upon deletion, whereas STABLE doesn't. So in STABLE you get an old copy of the invalidated iterator, hence it works. --=20 Good, fast & cheap. Pick any two.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTiko%2BK5jDqM=rZRg7nFA-yFKUAtpgL2UKmsoYRDe>