PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Jerry Asher
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 7:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Resolution! RE: [AOLSERVER] segmentation
violation: gdb stack trace WAS RE: [AOLSERVER] Trying to debug a C
module?
At 01:32 PM 10/27/01, you wrote:
>Thanks to the wee
At 01:32 PM 10/27/01, you wrote:
>Thanks to the weekly chat on AOLServer hosted every Thursday:
>
>* used libefence to locate a large for loop with an for loop that was
>populating a malloc structure, that was causing access to unallocated
>memory.
Can you expand on that a bit. What was involved
EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 7:45 AM
To: AOLserver Discussion
Subject: RE: [AOLSERVER] segmentation violation: gdb stack trace WAS RE:
[AOLSERVER] Trying to debug a C module?
Did a trace with a break on __libc_malloc and __libc_free.
Noticed that not 100% of the calls that
At 11:29 AM 10/25/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>+-- On Oct 25, Patrick Spence said:
> > Does it have to be compiled differently to enable the -z flag?
>
>No.
>
> > every time I
> > try to enable it on my server it prevents it from loading..
>
>Tell us exactly what you did and exactly what the co
+-- On Oct 25, Patrick Spence said:
> Does it have to be compiled differently to enable the -z flag?
No.
> every time I
> try to enable it on my server it prevents it from loading..
Tell us exactly what you did and exactly what the computer did.
At 10:37 AM 10/25/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Do you run nsd with the -z flag? If not, then it shouldn't matter.
Does it have to be compiled differently to enable the -z flag? or is there
some other part of the -z parameter (other than just -z) ... every time I
try to enable it on my server it prev
Do you run nsd with the -z flag? If not, then it shouldn't matter.
+-- On Oct 25, Sanjivendra Nath said:
> A couple of them called malloc directly. Would that make a difference?
> Looking at the ns_malloc code, it wouldn't seem to, 'cos if things go ok, it
> calls malloc. Is it absolu
Behalf
Of Sanjivendra Nath
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 7:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] segmentation violation: gdb stack trace WAS RE:
[AOLSERVER] Trying to debug a C module?
Yes, very reliably, every time. Same place, same stack trace.
In fact, if I change the adp sourc
pbm statement. Otherwise, it occurs
on 1.
-Original Message-
From: AOLserver Discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Rob Mayoff
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] segmentation violation: gdb stack trace WAS RE:
[AOLSERVER
Can you reproduce it reliably?
+-- On Oct 24, Sanjivendra Nath said:
> Any pointers on how to resolve this? Use libefence (or other tools) to try
> to find the offending malloc/free line for corruption of heap? (Using linux
> RH7.1)
, 2001 9:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] segmentation violation: gdb stack trace WAS RE:
[AOLSERVER] Trying to debug a C module?
+-- On Oct 24, Sanjivendra Nath said:
> Why would a malloc(10 bytes) cause a segmentation violation?
Because the heap has been corrup
+-- On Oct 24, Sanjivendra Nath said:
> Why would a malloc(10 bytes) cause a segmentation violation?
Because the heap has been corrupted. Perhaps something called free
twice on the same block, or wrote past the end of a block.
Thanks Jerry. This was helpful in localizing where the segmentation
violation is coming from.
Apparently, from trying to do a ns_malloc(10 bytes).
Why would a malloc(10 bytes) cause a segmentation violation? Has nsd8x
process ran out of heap space? But, I thought memory allocations are
dynami
13 matches
Mail list logo
