GNU bug report logs - #33014
26.1.50; 27.0.50; Fatal error after re-evaluating a thread's function

Previous Next

Full log

Message #68 received at 33014 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Gemini Lasswell <gazally <at> runbox.com>
Cc: 33014 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#33014: 26.1.50; 27.0.50;
 Fatal error after re-evaluating a thread's function
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 11:44:35 +0300

> From: Gemini Lasswell <gazally <at> runbox.com>
> Cc: 33014 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,  schwab <at> linux-m68k.org
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:22:36 -0700
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Anyway, are you saying that stack marking doesn't work in optimized
> > code?  We've been using this technique for the last 17 years without
> > problems; why would the fact that we have more than one thread change
> > that?  The same arguments you submit are valid for a single-threaded
> > Emacs, right?
> 
> Apparently so.  I set up a single-threaded situation where I could
> redefine a function while exec_byte_code was running it, and got a
> segfault.  I've gained some insights from debugging this version of the
> bug which I will put into a separate email.

If this is the case, then I think we should protect the definition of
a running function from GC, in some way, either by making sure it is
referenced by some stack-based Lisp object, even in heavily optimized
code (e.g., by using 'volatile' qualifiers); or by some other method
that will ensure that definition is marked and not swept.

Previous Next

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