Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/04/09/12:14:24
On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 02:34:04PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
>> On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 11:31:57AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> I wouldn't expect the stack pointer to be screwed up. I'd expect that
>> the *stack* is screwed up. I don't believe that the ecx
>> register should
>> be preserved across function calls so I don't know why this
>> would mater.
>
>Doh! Ask me how many years since I wrote assembly.... please :]
>
>Well, the exception occurs on the last line here (Intel format cause I'm
>reading intel doco).
>
>call 0x404c98 <sched_yield>
>mov %eax,DWORD PTR [%ebp-100]
>add %eax,4
>mov %edx,DWORD PTR [%eax]
>mov %ecx,DWORD PTR [%edx]
>mov DWORD PTR [%eax],%ecx
>
>As you can see, no stack references :[. And the crash doesn't occur if
>the thread doesn't lose the processor.
I'm confused by this snippet of assembly. It looks like gcc is using
the result of sched_yield to index into a table. But, %eax should be
either 0 or 1 in this case. So, maybe you're right. This is a gcc
problem. And, it may be fixed by configuring gcc with --enable-threads.
This is one of those situations where it looks like gcc can't be
released until a version of cygwin is released with the requisite
functionality.
cgf
>Now the registers should be saved when context switch's occur, so I
>don't believe the corruption occurs during that section of code, but
>rather:
>
>first thread setsup the try{}, returning an exception handler context.
>yields.
>main runs, starts second thread
>second thread is started, it sets up it's try{}, and recieves the _sames
>context_, yields.
>first thread completes, exits the try{}, trashing the exception handler
>context.
>
>I'm not going to look into this any alonger. IMO it's the
>__get_eh_context function in g++ which I know nothing about, and don't
>have a debug version built. I hopped on this initially to see if it was
>a pthreads issue...
>
>If it does turn out to be cygwin threads, rather than a non-reentrant
>library function, I'm happy to look at it again.
>
>>
>> Yep. Probably. Somebody should try that.
>
>Chuckle.
>
>> cgf
>>
>
>Rob.
>
>--
>Want to unsubscribe from this list?
>Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
--
cgf AT cygnus DOT com Red Hat, Inc.
http://sources.redhat.com/ http://www.redhat.com/
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -