Unfortunately that did not help. Still seeing the problem. I'm still working on
a test case but I'm not having much luck so far in getting an isolated repro.
I was able to get a debugger attached to the process right when handle_thunk
asserts, and there were 6 threads with the following call stack:
Thread 5 (Thread 0x558ff460 (LWP 9201)):
#0 handle_thunk (method=0x0, domain=0x4ce44e58, absolute=1, code=0x427f8f08
"Q\364\377\353\367\377\377\352",
target=0x511f02a0 "\r\300\240\341\360_-\351(\320M\342k\323\377\353",
dyn_code_mp=0x0) at mini-arm.c:3373
#1 0x00172764 in arm_patch_general (method=0x0, domain=0x0, code=0x427f8f08
"Q\364\377\353\367\377\377\352",
target=0x511f02a0 "\r\300\240\341\360_-\351(\320M\342k\323\377\353",
dyn_code_mp=0x0) at mini-arm.c:3425
#2 0x00172ca8 in arm_patch (code=0x427f8f08 "Q\364\377\353\367\377\377\352",
target=0x511f02a0 "\r\300\240\341\360_-\351(\320M\342k\323\377\353") at
mini-arm.c:3536
#3 0x001830bc in mono_arch_patch_callsite (method_start=0x427f8e90
"\r\300\240\341\360_-\351(\320M\342", code_ptr=0x427f8f0c "\367\377\377\352",
addr=0x511f02a0 "\r\300\240\341\360_-\351(\320M\342k\323\377\353") at
tramp-arm.c:87
#4 0x0012c5c8 in common_call_trampoline (regs=0x558fd090, code=0x427f8f0c
"\367\377\377\352", m=0x2a08a000, tramp=0x2e4bcd80 "x\320\217U", vt=0x0,
vtable_slot=0x0,
need_rgctx_tramp=0) at mini-trampolines.c:673
#5 0x0012c67c in mono_magic_trampoline (regs=0x558fd090, code=0x427f8f0c
"\367\377\377\352", arg=0x2a08a000, tramp=0x2e4bcd80 "x\320\217U") at
mini-trampolines.c:690
#6 0x403f5060 in ?? ()
#7 0x403f5060 in ?? ()
All 6 threads where in a trampoline. The method in frame 4 was
"mono_thread_interruption_checkpoint" for all six threads.
Does this give you any more clues into what is going on?
This is blocking our upgrade to mono-3-0 unfortunately. Any help will be
greatly appreciated.
From: Zoltan Varga <var...@gmail.com<mailto:var...@gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 3:20 AM
To: Bassam Tabbara <bas...@symform.com<mailto:bas...@symform.com>>
Cc: "mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com<mailto:mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com>"
<mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com<mailto:mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com>>
Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Assert in mini-arm.c
Hi,
This is a JIT problem, it will be hard to track down without a testcase. You
can try changing this line in mono/utils/mono-codeman.c:
#define BIND_ROOM 8
to
#define BIND_ROOM 4
It might fix the issue.
Zoltan
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Bassam Tabbara
<bas...@symform.com<mailto:bas...@symform.com>> wrote:
Folks,
Any insights into why the assert would trigger? Is this a resource exhaustion
issue, or is specific to certain code that is being JITed? I need someone to
point me in the right direction. I'm able to reproduce this but only in the
context of our application. This did not happen with the mono-2-10 branch.
Thanks!
Bassam
From: Bassam Tabbara <bas...@symform.com<mailto:bas...@symform.com>>
Date: Friday, August 9, 2013 10:36 AM
To: "mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com<mailto:mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com>"
<mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com<mailto:mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com>>
Subject: [Mono-dev] Assert in mini-arm.c
Hello,
I'm seeing the following assert on an armv5tel using latest from master:
http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=CLDXxiPy
I'm trying to get an isolated repro but it proving to be elusive. In our full
test runs we see this all the time.
Any tips on how to debug this further?
Thanks!
Bassam
_______________________________________________
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com<mailto:Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com>
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
_______________________________________________
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
