GNU bug report logs - #12453
failed test suite on 64-bit debian squeeze

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 12453 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 12453 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Laurence Maddox <maddox_laurence <at> yahoo.com>
To: bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
Subject: failed test suite on 64-bit debian squeeze
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 13:23:16 -0700 (PDT)

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I am in chapter 5 of Linux from Scratch, and the coreutils test suite fails with a message instructing me to file a bug report to you. It also mentions a log file, which I have included.

My system is a corei7 running a debian squeeze ramboot live-cd. I have sufficient memory and disk space.

[test-suite.log (text/x-log, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 12453 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
To: Laurence Maddox <maddox_laurence <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: 12453 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12453: failed test suite on 64-bit debian squeeze
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 22:38:28 +0200

Laurence Maddox wrote:
> I am in chapter 5 of Linux from Scratch, and the coreutils test suite
> fails with a message instructing me to file a bug report to you. It
> also mentions a log file, which I have included.
>
> My system is a corei7 running a debian squeeze ramboot live-cd. I have
> sufficient memory and disk space.
>
> ==============================================
>    GNU coreutils 8.19: tests/test-suite.log
> ==============================================
>
> # TOTAL: 491
> # PASS:  415
> # SKIP:  75
> # XFAIL: 0
> # FAIL:  1
> # XPASS: 0
> # ERROR: 0
...
> FAIL: misc/sort-u-FMR
> =====================
...
> sort (GNU coreutils) 8.19
...
> + require_valgrind_
> + valgrind --help
> + echo 0
> + printf '%0900d\n' 1
> + valgrind --error-exitcode=1 sort --p=1 -S32b -u in
> ==26580== Memcheck, a memory error detector
> ==26580== Copyright (C) 2002-2010, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
> ==26580== Using Valgrind-3.6.0.SVN-Debian and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
> ==26580== Command: sort --p=1 -S32b -u in
> ==26580==
> ==26580== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> ==26580==    at 0x4017676: index (strchr.S:55)
> ==26580==    by 0x4007752: expand_dynamic_string_token (dl-load.c:430)
> ==26580==    by 0x4007FC4: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:2277)
> ==26580==    by 0x40016ED: map_doit (rtld.c:632)
> ==26580==    by 0x400E535: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:177)
> ==26580==    by 0x4000FFD: do_preload (rtld.c:821)
> ==26580==    by 0x40043B6: dl_main (rtld.c:1725)
> ==26580==    by 0x401490D: _dl_sysdep_start (dl-sysdep.c:242)
> ==26580==    by 0x4004C6D: _dl_start (rtld.c:337)
> ==26580==    by 0x4001507: ??? (in /mnt/lfs/tools/lib/ld-2.16.so)
> ==26580==    by 0x4: ???
> ==26580==    by 0x7FEFFBC12: ???
> ==26580==
> ==26580== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> ==26580==    at 0x401767B: index (strchr.S:58)
> ==26580==    by 0x4007752: expand_dynamic_string_token (dl-load.c:430)
> ==26580==    by 0x4007FC4: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:2277)
> ==26580==    by 0x40016ED: map_doit (rtld.c:632)
> ==26580==    by 0x400E535: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:177)
> ==26580==    by 0x4000FFD: do_preload (rtld.c:821)
> ==26580==    by 0x40043B6: dl_main (rtld.c:1725)
> ==26580==    by 0x401490D: _dl_sysdep_start (dl-sysdep.c:242)
> ==26580==    by 0x4004C6D: _dl_start (rtld.c:337)
> ==26580==    by 0x4001507: ??? (in /mnt/lfs/tools/lib/ld-2.16.so)
> ==26580==    by 0x4: ???
> ==26580==    by 0x7FEFFBC12: ???
> ==26580==
> --26580-- Warning: DWARF2 CFI reader: unhandled DW_OP_ opcode 0x2a
>
> valgrind: m_debuginfo/readdwarf.c:2329 (copy_convert_CfiExpr_tree): Assertion 'srcix >= 0 && srcix < VG_(sizeXA)(srcxa)' failed.
> ==26580==    at 0x3802B0A7: report_and_quit (m_libcassert.c:191)
> ==26580==    by 0x3802B2E0: vgPlain_assert_fail (m_libcassert.c:265)
> ==26580==    by 0x3809C7BF: copy_convert_CfiExpr_tree (readdwarf.c:2329)
> ==26580==    by 0x3809CB05: summarise_context (readdwarf.c:2129)
> ==26580==    by 0x3809F1BD: run_CF_instructions (readdwarf.c:3541)
> ==26580==    by 0x380A0DDC: vgModuleLocal_read_callframe_info_dwarf3 (readdwarf.c:4079)
> ==26580==    by 0x38058A85: vgModuleLocal_read_elf_debug_info (readelf.c:2077)
> ==26580==    by 0x38054229: vgPlain_di_notify_mmap (debuginfo.c:818)
> ==26580==    by 0x38071689: vgModuleLocal_generic_PRE_sys_mmap (syswrap-generic.c:2039)
> ==26580==    by 0x38092BC9: vgSysWrap_amd64_linux_sys_mmap_before (syswrap-amd64-linux.c:995)
> ==26580==    by 0x38067EE7: vgPlain_client_syscall (syswrap-main.c:1442)
> ==26580==    by 0x38064A4D: handle_syscall (scheduler.c:895)
> ==26580==    by 0x380658B9: vgPlain_scheduler (scheduler.c:1091)
> ==26580==    by 0x3808F194: run_a_thread_NORETURN (syswrap-linux.c:94)
>
> sched status:
>   running_tid=1
>
> Thread 1: status = VgTs_Runnable
> ==26580==    at 0x401721A: mmap (syscall-template.S:81)
> ==26580==    by 0x4006757: _dl_map_object_from_fd (dl-load.c:1333)
> ==26580==    by 0x4008054: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:2344)
> ==26580==    by 0x400C781: openaux (dl-deps.c:63)
> ==26580==    by 0x400E535: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:177)
> ==26580==    by 0x400C9C6: _dl_map_object_deps (dl-deps.c:256)
> ==26580==    by 0x40030C8: dl_main (rtld.c:1834)
> ==26580==    by 0x401490D: _dl_sysdep_start (dl-sysdep.c:242)
> ==26580==    by 0x4004C6D: _dl_start (rtld.c:337)
> ==26580==    by 0x4001507: ??? (in /mnt/lfs/tools/lib/ld-2.16.so)
> ==26580==    by 0x4: ???
> ==26580==    by 0x7FEFFBC12: ???
> ==26580==    by 0x7FEFFBC17: ???
> ==26580==    by 0x7FEFFBC1D: ???
> ==26580==    by 0x7FEFFBC23: ???
> ==26580==    by 0x7FEFFBC26: ???

Thank you for reporting that.
At first glance, that failing assertion seems due to a bug in your
system's version of valgrind.  I don't immediately see a clean way
to work around it.  Sure, the dirty way would be to search for this
line:

> valgrind: m_debuginfo/readdwarf.c:2329 (copy_convert_CfiExpr_tree): Assertion 'srcix >= 0 && srcix < VG_(sizeXA)(srcxa)' failed.

and when found, skip the test, saying "your version of valgrind is
inadequate".  In any case, this failure does not mean sort has a
problem.  Just valgrind, and maybe the test itself, for relying
on valgrind.

Message #11 received at 12453 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Assaf Gordon <assafgordon <at> gmail.com>
To: 12453 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12453: failed test suite on 64-bit debian squeeze
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:03:30 -0700

tags 12453 moreinfo
close 12453
stop


On 2012-09-16 2:38 p.m., Jim Meyering wrote:
> Thank you for reporting that.
> At first glance, that failing assertion seems due to a bug in your
> system's version of valgrind.  I don't immediately see a clean way
> to work around it.  Sure, the dirty way would be to search for this
> line:

With no further comments in 6 years, I'm closing this bug.

-assaf

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.