From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32186 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2011 20:30:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 32177 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2011 20:30:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 20:30:28 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1IKUHgG016879 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:30:17 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1IKUHKv023495; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:30:17 -0500 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p1IKUGSc012892; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:30:16 -0500 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 27605378BE1; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:30:16 -0700 (MST) From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Keith Seitz , Pierre Muller Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix for testsuite errors with gdbserver (remote) References: <4D5C71F6.80208@vmware.com> <000901cbcf8b$a7e35b50$f7aa11f0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <4D5EBF32.30802@redhat.com> <201102181954.25496.pedro@codesourcery.com> Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 20:31:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Tom Tromey's message of "Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:26:05 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-02/txt/msg00497.txt.bz2 Tom> All that python_inferior_exit is doing to provoke the crash is calling Tom> get_current_arch. Under what circumstances is this not safe? I would Tom> have thought -- perhaps naively -- that it was always safe. This is maybe a little too brief. get_current_arch calls has_stack_frames. My view is that has_stack_frames relies on some invariants that should hold for the various globals it accesses. Maybe it is using them incorrectly. Or maybe the invariants, whatever they are, are violated elsewhere. I think Pierre's patch operates on the latter theory. I don't really know enough to know whether it is correct. Tom