X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=r8HyGwwG9eYFizv2DnUTT8W5mzmVVNSMrFCWCrqG76K 5LTZeMinsum3Ai82TPtZf2z7XPx66WbnX7bKw0RyD6W56J8HnjEkUfAAQQkSjUAO gmYAaUz7qYNKJ67Gs/oDdkdqg0oxPL6sq1BpY5UvR4/IGFG4lCl0F/UyaTSugDD0 = DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=ckn+sXtzFuTJvYw5+POMKR0gOEs=; b=Et4RBECwML+5h1u3b CcHiGPteFWXFDlAamz0t48IeP6M+T5YaOT/z7kQCADrqlz7rbQFyJeaW2Ogun/Zq 0um7h2tNQ4ahXvGByQiBVpuxCHaHlpRAAnGXRXXhL+n0GaF4cVZzVnh//t9rQFQB +wppD4E70bVz8D6qe2ZYehLeQc= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: out1-smtp.messagingengine.com Message-ID: <5448E6F9.8040005@dronecode.org.uk> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:31:05 +0100 From: Jon TURNEY User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ken Brown , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Threads References: <54450835 DOT 3050602 AT cornell DOT edu> In-Reply-To: <54450835.3050602@cornell.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 20/10/2014 14:03, Ken Brown wrote: > Or is there some other plausible explanation for "impossible" crashes? > This can't just be a result of a gdb bug, because in at least one case > the assertion can be shown to be valid by using printf instead of gdb. > > [*] By "impossible" I mean that examination of the relevant variables in > gdb shows that the assertions are in fact true. Two ongoing examples are > > http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=18438 > http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=18769 As a suggestion, you might want to also take a careful look at how signal delivery is implemented in cygwin on x86_64 I had a vague idea that there was, at some time in the past, a fix made for register corruption on x86_64 after a signal was handled, but I can't find it now, so maybe I imagined it. But if for e.g. the flags register was getting corrupted when a signal interrupts the main thread, that could perhaps also explain what is being seen. (More generally, it doesn't have to be another thread which is causing these problems, it could be some form of interrupt) -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple