On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 11:32 PM, LEVAI Daniel <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 September 2009 15.27.01 you wrote:
>> On Monday 07 September 2009 18.44.42 Owain Ainsworth wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 11:27:31AM +0200, LEVAI Daniel wrote:
>> > > Fatal server error:
>> > > Caught signal 11. Server aborting
>> >
>> > Please checkout the xenocara tree and follow the instructions in README
>> > in order to provide a gdb backtrace with debug symbols.
>> >
>> > I have no idea why people think that X is different in this respect to
>> > other applications...
>>
>> Thanks for the pointer, I got it. Here is the output of bt full:
> [...]
>
> Can I be of more assistance with this? Is there a suspicion about what
could
> this be?
>From your gdb backtrace:
#0 0x1c0b7db0 in xf86_reload_cursors (screen=0x7ec3b000)
at /usr/xenocara/xserver/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Cursors.c:615
615 if (!cursor_screen_priv->isUp)
#0 0x1c0b7db0 in xf86_reload_cursors (screen=0x7ec3b000)
at /usr/xenocara/xserver/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Cursors.c:615
scrn = 0x88c64800
xf86_config = 0x891b25b0
cursor_info = 0x875c7300
cursor = 0x8a28c000
x = -1994706896
y = 2126768128
cursor_screen_priv = 0x0
this is a null-pointer dereference crash:
/usr/xenocara/xserver/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Cursors.c
612 cursor_screen_priv = dixLookupPrivate(&screen->devPrivates,
613 xf86CursorScreenKey);
614 /* return if HW cursor is inactive, to avoid displaying two
cursors
615 if (!cursor_screen_priv->isUp)
616 return;
I'm stating the obvious here, of course. Whether it's OK for
dixLookupPrivate() to return NULL or if that points to further
problems is /way/ beyond my grasp of knowledge. If it is acceptable
for a NULL to be returned, a simple check for a NULL pointer before
the dereference could fix the crash.
But, wait for someone more qualified to chime in :-)
--patrick
