http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
Oleg Smolsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Smolsky ---
The ASan issue was due to the memory limit applied via setrlimit(). The virtual
size (in this -fPIC -pie build) is really huge and so memory allocations were
failing. I'll confirm the TSan case in a bit.
Than
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Smolsky ---
Created attachment 30875
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30875&action=edit
another stack
ASAN_OPTIONS=malloc_context_size=1 gets me passed the initial issue, but the
code gets stuck here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #8 from Kostya Serebryany ---
ouch!
free calling malloc. this is not going to work :)
This code has changed since our last merge to gcc --
the trunk version does not have strerror call any more.
I really hope to make another merge
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Smolsky ---
Created attachment 30874
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30874&action=edit
full stack
Here is the full stack. It comes from the very same spot in my app.
As for the minimal repro - that's
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #12 from Kostya Serebryany ---
You can also try
ASAN_OPTIONS=malloc_context_size=1 (or 0)
this will eliminate this particular call to mmap (but will reduce the
usefulness
of asan report)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Smolsky ---
Sure. The verbose thing does not yield much:
==1236== Parsed ASAN_OPTIONS: verbosity=1
==1236== AddressSanitizer: libc interceptors initialized
|| `[0x10007fff8000, 0x7fff]` || HighMem||
|| `[0x02
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #10 from Kostya Serebryany ---
Your stack traces tells me this:
__sanitizer::MmapOrDie calls strerror, which means that mmap call failed.
This may happen if the process OOM-ed (unlikely in your case),
or may have some kind of limit (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Smolsky ---
Hold on, I don't get the "more memory" bit. This happens very early, before
anything else of merit. Also, it turns out that this isn't a deadlock, the main
thread is spinning inside asan code.
USER PID %
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58465
--- Comment #6 from Kostya Serebryany ---
Is that the full stack trace?
(As usual, a reproducer will help us much)
10 matches
Mail list logo