Re: [Rd] R on Solaris 10 x64

[Greg Nakhimovsky]

Peter,

Thanks for the hints.

> 2 things caught my eye (except that their "R code" is clearly C): The 
> dbx output doesn't show off[curr_seq], which could actually be the 
> culprit, 

(dbx) p off[curr_seq]
off[curr_seq] = 0

> and the _memcpy call on the stack looks odd:
> 
> _memcpy(0x0, 0xfdebc707, 0x9f5c4f0)

It shows the register values, which are not necessarily the 
arguments to memcpy(), apparently not in this case.

The "guilty" line of code

HDmemcpy(tgath_buf,buf+off[curr_seq],curr_len);

translates into (due to macro "#define HDmemcpy(X,Y,Z) 
memcpy((char*)(X),(const char*)(Y),Z)")

memcpy((char*)(tgath_buf),(const char*)(buf+off[curr_seq]),curr_len);

and

(dbx) p tgath_buf
tgath_buf = 0x9f5c4f0
(definitely not NULL)

We've also asked for help at [EMAIL PROTECTED] regarding the HDF5 
package.

This is under Solaris 10 x86, using the latest Sun Studio 
compiler/tools.

-Greg

> 
> 
> (What happened to the length and how did NULL get in there.) If memcpy() 
> is a  macro, I think I'd take a closer look at the include files and see 
> if something is getting expanded  in an unintended way.

__
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

Re: [Rd] R on Solaris 10 x64

[Greg Nakhimovsky]

> Hmm, and can you see "both ends" of tgath_buf and buf (in particular 
> tgath_but[curr_len - 1] and buf[curr_len-1])?

(dbx) p tgath_buf[curr_len - 1]
tgath_buf[curr_len-1] = '\0'
(dbx) p buf[curr_len-1]
dbx: cannot access address 0x9f7f6ff
(dbx) p tgath_buf[curr_len - 2]
tgath_buf[curr_len-2] = '\0'
(dbx) p buf[curr_len-2]
dbx: cannot access address 0x9f7f6fe
(dbx)

Something is definitely wrong with this memcpy() operation. I 
suppose we'll need some help from the HDF5 folks to figure out 
what the buf memory buffer is supposed contain in this case.

> If only to "eliminate from our inquiries", I'd try running CPP over the 
> code and see if the full macro expansion (including that from memcpy to 
> _memcpy) is working as intended.

After the macro expansion, this code looks like this:

 for(curr_seq=0; curr_seq I take it that you've already tried compiling the module at maximal 
> warning level?

No. We can try that, as well as lint.

Thanks.

-Greg

__
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel