Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 06 Oct 2008 02:57:39 +0300
From:      Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
To:        jos@catnook.com
Cc:        Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru>, Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: firefox3-bin crashes near arc4random_buf()
Message-ID:  <877i8mioi4.fsf@kobe.laptop>
In-Reply-To: <20081005233256.GB8507@lizzy.catnook.local> (Jos Backus's message of "Sun, 5 Oct 2008 16:32:56 -0700")
References:  <20081004080511.GA72641@lizzy.catnook.local> <20081004161024.GA67323@nagual.pp.ru> <20081004222249.GA48928@lizzy.catnook.local> <48E80F02.4070309@freebsd.org> <20081005233256.GB8507@lizzy.catnook.local>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 16:32:56 -0700, Jos Backus <jos@catnook.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 05:49:06PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote:
>> First, you need to share the first items in the
>> backtrace, as they're more likely to be correct.
>> I agree with Andrey that it looks like there's
>> some stack corruption, so it's hard to trust
>> anything except the first couple of entries.
>
> Attached is a tarball containing firefox3.gdb which has the full
> output of `bt'. Unfortunately it doesn't tell me very much more.

Unfortunately, tarballs are stripped off by the list software.

Can you upload this online somewhere and point us to a URL?

If the backtrace is not exceedingly large, you could also include it
_inline_ in a message.

>> You should also look at several independent core
>> dumps and see how much the backtraces have in common.
>
> I watched it crash a bunch more times and the backtraces are the
> same. That's good, right? :-)

In a way :)

It means that there is a semi-predictable bug that can be reproduced
in a sufficiently `repeatable' manner.  That's good, I guess.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?877i8mioi4.fsf>