GNU bug report logs - #39118
3.0.0 JIT segfaults on 64-bit Cygwin

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 39118 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 39118 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
Cc: bug-guile <at> gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: GNU Guile 2.9.9 Released [beta]
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 12:26:27 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Guile 2.9.9, like .8 and .7, does not build on Cygwin (64 bit).  Configure
runs without error, but make crashes with this (truncated to just the tail):

Making all in bootstrap
make[2]: Entering directory
'/cygdrive/c/Users/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/bootstrap'
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/eval.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/psyntax-pp.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/intmap.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/intset.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/graphs.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/vlist.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC srfi/srfi-1.go
/bin/sh: line 6:  4294 Segmentation fault      (core dumped)
GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0 ../meta/build-env guild compile
--target="x86_64-unknown-cygwin" -O1 -Oresolve-primitives -L
"/home/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/module" -L
"/home/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/guile-readline" -o "srfi/srfi-1.go"
"../module/srfi/srfi-1.scm"
make[2]: *** [Makefile:1930: srfi/srfi-1.go] Error 139
make[2]: Leaving directory
'/cygdrive/c/Users/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/bootstrap'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:1849: all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory
'/cygdrive/c/Users/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9'
make: *** [Makefile:1735: all] Error 2

All previous problems (which were easy to work around) have gone away in
this release, which is progress, but it doesn't get me past Guile 2.2.



John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan <at> ccil.org
Your worships will perhaps be thinking that it is an easy thing
to blow up a dog? [Or] to write a book?
    --Don Quixote, Introduction

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #8 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39118: GNU Guile 2.9.9 Released [beta]
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 18:09:13 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Okay, with GUILE_JIT_THRESHOLD set to -1 in the environment, I can build
Guile under Cygwin.  There are two test failures which probably reflect
differences between newlib and glibc:

ERROR: time.test: strptime: GNU %s format: strftime fr_FR.utf8 - arguments:
((system-error "strptime" "~A" ("Invalid argument") (22)))
ERROR: time.test: strptime: GNU %s format: strftime fr_FR.iso88591 -
arguments: ((system-error "strptime" "~A" ("Invalid argument") (22)))

And that's that: Cygwin can support Guile 3.0 without JIT.  It might be a
good idea to force this variable on in "configure" when building under
Cygwin.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #13 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 17:35:13 +0100

Hi John,

John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org> skribis:

> Guile 2.9.9, like .8 and .7, does not build on Cygwin (64 bit).  Configure
> runs without error, but make crashes with this (truncated to just the tail):
>
> Making all in bootstrap
> make[2]: Entering directory
> '/cygdrive/c/Users/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/bootstrap'
>   BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/eval.go
>   BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/psyntax-pp.go
>   BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/intmap.go
>   BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/intset.go
>   BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/graphs.go
>   BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/vlist.go
>   BOOTSTRAP GUILEC srfi/srfi-1.go
> /bin/sh: line 6:  4294 Segmentation fault      (core dumped)
> GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0 ../meta/build-env guild compile
> --target="x86_64-unknown-cygwin" -O1 -Oresolve-primitives -L
> "/home/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/module" -L
> "/home/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/guile-readline" -o "srfi/srfi-1.go"
> "../module/srfi/srfi-1.scm"
> make[2]: *** [Makefile:1930: srfi/srfi-1.go] Error 139
> make[2]: Leaving directory
> '/cygdrive/c/Users/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9/bootstrap'
> make[1]: *** [Makefile:1849: all-recursive] Error 1
> make[1]: Leaving directory
> '/cygdrive/c/Users/rr828893/Downloads/guile-2.9.9'
> make: *** [Makefile:1735: all] Error 2

Could you try building 3.0.0 with JIT enabled and grab a backtrace?

Thanks in advance!

Ludo’.

Message #16 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:38:35 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Yes, gladly, but I don't know how to get one in this context.  Do I need to
add some flags to the Makefile, and if so, where?  (It's a twisty maze of
passages, all different.) . Note that this *is* a build with JIT enabled;
when I disable it using the env variable, there are no errors and 3.0.0
works fine.

Also, it may take some time, as I have to rebuild my Windows system.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #19 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
To: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:22:53 -0800

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 11:38:35AM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Yes, gladly, but I don't know how to get one in this context.  Do I need to
> add some flags to the Makefile, and if so, where?  (It's a twisty maze of
> passages, all different.) . Note that this *is* a build with JIT enabled;
> when I disable it using the env variable, there are no errors and 3.0.0
> works fine.
> 
> Also, it may take some time, as I have to rebuild my Windows system.

I also tried building Guile 3.0.0 on Cygwin 3.1.x.  The failure comes from
trying to parse compiled .go files.

The last time that I had this sort of problem, it was because the
O_BINARY flag was dropped or missing when writing .go files, leading
to CR+LF characters in the compiled files.  And I diagnosed it by
byte-comparing Linux-compiled .go files with Cygwin-compiled .go
files, and by looking for CR+LF combinations in the compiled .go
files.

I don't know if that is what is happening here, but, I'll check that
next time I have a chance.

Thanks,
Michael

Message #25 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 10:01:58 +0100

Hello,

John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org> skribis:

> Yes, gladly, but I don't know how to get one in this context.

You would unpack, configure, and build like you did before (with JIT
enabled, so as to reproduce the crash), but before that you’d run
“ulimit -c unlimited” in that shell to make sure there’s a core dumped
when it crashes.

Once it has crashed, locate the ‘core’ file (or ‘core.*’), and run, say:

  gdb libguile/.libs/guile bootstrap/core

Then from the GDB prompt:

  thread apply all bt

TIA,
Ludo’.

Message #28 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu>
To: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39118: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 19:40:12 +0100

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:01:58AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> but before that you’d run
> “ulimit -c unlimited” in that shell to make sure there’s a core dumped
> when it crashes.

This won't work on cygwin. If you want a core dump, you should use the
dumper tool, as described here
https://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/dumper.html
Or you can set error_start to gdb to get an interactive gdb session on error.

s

Message #31 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 16:37:01 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Thanks.  Unfortunately, the standard recipe for making core dumps on Mac
(put "limit core unlimited" into /etc/launchd.conf and reboot, make sure
/cores is writable, set ulimit -c unlimited) seem to actually enable them
on MacOS Catalina (10.15.2).  I have tested with SIGQUIT and SIGSEGV on
running processes and no dumps appear in /cores.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:02 AM Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org> skribis:
>
> > Yes, gladly, but I don't know how to get one in this context.
>
> You would unpack, configure, and build like you did before (with JIT
> enabled, so as to reproduce the crash), but before that you’d run
> “ulimit -c unlimited” in that shell to make sure there’s a core dumped
> when it crashes.
>
> Once it has crashed, locate the ‘core’ file (or ‘core.*’), and run, say:
>
>   gdb libguile/.libs/guile bootstrap/core
>
> Then from the GDB prompt:
>
>   thread apply all bt
>
> TIA,
> Ludo’.
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #34 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39118: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 16:53:23 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I'm no longer talking about Cygwin (which builds fine without JIT).  I'm
now talking about MacOS Catalina, which needs a core dump to debug, but on
which nobody seems to know how to enable core dumps.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 1:41 PM szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:01:58AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > but before that you’d run
> > “ulimit -c unlimited” in that shell to make sure there’s a core dumped
> > when it crashes.
>
> This won't work on cygwin. If you want a core dump, you should use the
> dumper tool, as described here
> https://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/dumper.html
> Or you can set error_start to gdb to get an interactive gdb session on
> error.
>
> s
>
>
>
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #37 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:35:46 +0100

Hi,

John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org> skribis:

> Thanks.  Unfortunately, the standard recipe for making core dumps on Mac

This bug report is about Cygwin, not macOS, right?  :-)

Ludo’.

Message #40 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 09:36:59 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Both Cygwin and MacOS crash in pretty much the same way.  By disabling the
JIT, I was able to get the Cygwin build to run to completion.  On MacOS
with --disable-jit, however, I am now getting an entirely new failure:

  CC       readline.lo
readline.c:432:7: warning: implicitly declaring library function 'strncmp'
with type 'int (const char *, const char *,
      unsigned long)' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
  if (strncmp (rl_get_keymap_name (rl_get_keymap ()), "vi", 2))
      ^
readline.c:432:7: note: include the header <string.h> or explicitly provide
a declaration for 'strncmp'
readline.c:432:16: warning: implicit declaration of function
'rl_get_keymap_name' is invalid in C99
      [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
  if (strncmp (rl_get_keymap_name (rl_get_keymap ()), "vi", 2))
               ^
readline.c:432:16: warning: incompatible integer to pointer conversion
passing 'int' to parameter of type 'const char *'
      [-Wint-conversion]
  if (strncmp (rl_get_keymap_name (rl_get_keymap ()), "vi", 2))
               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3 warnings generated.
  CCLD     guile-readline.la
Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
  "_rl_get_keymap_name", referenced from:
      _scm_init_readline in readline.o
ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see
invocation)

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:35 PM Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org> skribis:
>
> > Thanks.  Unfortunately, the standard recipe for making core dumps on Mac
>
> This bug report is about Cygwin, not macOS, right?  :-)
>
> Ludo’.
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #43 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: dsmich <at> roadrunner.com
To: "'John Cowan'" <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: "'39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org'" <39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 'Ludovic Courtès' <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 "'guile-devel <at> gnu.org'" <guile-devel <at> gnu.org>
Subject: RE: bug#39118: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 15:26:42 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Pretty sure that the missing readline symbol is because the macos
readline is being used/found instead of GNU readline.

	-Dale

	-----------------------------------------From: "John Cowan" 
To: "Ludovic Courtès"
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Sent: Friday January 24 2020 9:36:59AM
Subject: bug#39118: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin

Both Cygwin and MacOS crash in pretty much the same way. By disabling
the JIT, I was able to get the Cygwin build to run to completion. On
MacOS with --disable-jit, however, I am now getting an entirely new
failure:
 CC readline.lo
readline.c:432:7: warning: implicitly declaring library function
'strncmp' with type 'int (const char *, const char *,
 unsigned long)' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
 if (strncmp (rl_get_keymap_name (rl_get_keymap ()), "vi", 2))
 ^
readline.c:432:7: note: include the header  or explicitly provide a
declaration for 'strncmp'
readline.c:432:16: warning: implicit declaration of function
'rl_get_keymap_name' is invalid in C99
 [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
 if (strncmp (rl_get_keymap_name (rl_get_keymap ()), "vi", 2))
 ^
readline.c:432:16: warning: incompatible integer to pointer conversion
passing 'int' to parameter of type 'const char *'
 [-Wint-conversion]
 if (strncmp (rl_get_keymap_name (rl_get_keymap ()), "vi", 2))
 ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3 warnings generated.
 CCLD guile-readline.la [1]
Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
 "_rl_get_keymap_name", referenced from:
 _scm_init_readline in readline.o
ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see
invocation)

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:35 PM Ludovic Courtès  wrote:
Hi,

 John Cowan  skribis:

 > Thanks. Unfortunately, the standard recipe for making core dumps on
Mac

 This bug report is about Cygwin, not macOS, right? :-)

 Ludo’.
  

Links:
------
[1] http://guile-readline.la
[2] mailto:ludo <at> gnu.org
[3] mailto:cowan <at> ccil.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #46 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2020 14:51:03 +0100

John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org> skribis:

> Both Cygwin and MacOS crash in pretty much the same way.  By disabling the
> JIT, I was able to get the Cygwin build to run to completion.

That I understand.  However, I was asking for the backtrace of the crash
on Cygwin when JIT is enabled.  Could you grab it?

Thanks in advance,
Ludo’.

Message #49 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2020 10:54:40 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 8:51 AM Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:


> That I understand.  However, I was asking for the backtrace of the crash
> on Cygwin when JIT is enabled.  Could you grab it?
>

1. The wisdom of the Internet has not been able to figure out how to
generate a core dump on MacOS 10.15.2 (Catalina).  The usual set of
enabling steps can be performed without error, but still no core dump.

2. Until today I believed that there was no way to generate a Cygwin core
dump.  I know now that there is, but I may not be able to test it until
Monday.  I'll let you know, and hopefully that will provide insight into
the MacOS problem as well.

3.  I will try to work further on the MacOS libffi problem (which surfaces
when you do --disable-jit to bypass the above problem) to convince MacOS to
use GNU libffi rather than the native one.  It probably has to do with
pkg-config, which I barely understand.

"All problems are config problems."



John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan <at> ccil.org
We are lost, lost.  No name, no business, no Precious, nothing.  Only empty.
Only hungry: yes, we are hungry.  A few little fishes, nassty bony little
fishes, for a poor creature, and they say death.  So wise they are; so just,
so very just.  --Gollum

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #52 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 09:23:19 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Aaaand... Cygwin doesn't do core dumps. Under the skin it's WIndows, after
all.  This is what I get when I specify ulimit -c unlimited and rebuild:

Exception: STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION at rip=0055A8B1B25
rax=0000000000000000 rbx=FFFFFFFFFFFFFF90 rcx=FFFFFFFFFFFFFF90
rdx=000000000034964A rsi=000007000084ECC0 rdi=FFFFFFFFFFFFFF90
r8 =000007000084ECC0 r9 =0000000000000002 r10=0000000100000000
r11=000000055A86B190 r12=0000000000000002 r13=000000055A931EA0
r14=000006FFFFFEF840 r15=0000000000000000
rbp=000000000034964A rsp=00000000FFFFBDA0
program=C:\Users\rr828893\Downloads\guile-3.0.0\libguile\.libs\guile.exe,
pid 62833, thread main
cs=0033 ds=002B es=002B fs=0053 gs=002B ss=002B

I can't imagine what you can make of that.

On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 10:54 AM John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 8:51 AM Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
>
>> That I understand.  However, I was asking for the backtrace of the crash
>> on Cygwin when JIT is enabled.  Could you grab it?
>>
>
> 1. The wisdom of the Internet has not been able to figure out how to
> generate a core dump on MacOS 10.15.2 (Catalina).  The usual set of
> enabling steps can be performed without error, but still no core dump.
>
> 2. Until today I believed that there was no way to generate a Cygwin core
> dump.  I know now that there is, but I may not be able to test it until
> Monday.  I'll let you know, and hopefully that will provide insight into
> the MacOS problem as well.
>
> 3.  I will try to work further on the MacOS libffi problem (which surfaces
> when you do --disable-jit to bypass the above problem) to convince MacOS to
> use GNU libffi rather than the native one.  It probably has to do with
> pkg-config, which I barely understand.
>
> "All problems are config problems."
>
>
>
> John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan <at> ccil.org
> We are lost, lost.  No name, no business, no Precious, nothing.  Only
> empty.
> Only hungry: yes, we are hungry.  A few little fishes, nassty bony little
> fishes, for a poor creature, and they say death.  So wise they are; so
> just,
> so very just.  --Gollum
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

[guile.exe.stackdump (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #55 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu>
To: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39118: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 23:11:38 +0100

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 09:23:19AM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Aaaand... Cygwin doesn't do core dumps. Under the skin it's WIndows, after
> all.  This is what I get when I specify ulimit -c unlimited and rebuild:
> [...]

Please see my previous mail on how to get a real core dump on cygwin
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=39118#28


>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 8:51 AM Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>>
>>> That I understand.  However, I was asking for the backtrace of the crash
>>> on Cygwin when JIT is enabled.  Could you grab it?

#v+
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/eval.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/psyntax-pp.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/intmap.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/intset.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/cps/graphs.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC ice-9/vlist.go
  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC srfi/srfi-1.go

Thread 1 received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 7444.0x2640]
0x000000055a8b1b25 in scm_to_uint64 (val=val <at> entry=0xffffffffffffff90) at ../../guile-3.0.0/libguile/conv-uinteger.i.c:44
44        else if (SCM_BIGP (val))
(gdb) bt
#0  0x000000055a8b1b25 in scm_to_uint64 (val=val <at> entry=0xffffffffffffff90) at ../../guile-3.0.0/libguile/conv-uinteger.i.c:44
#1  0x000000055a86b1ea in scm_bytevector_copy_x (source=0x700000948620, source_start=0x34964a, target=0x700000907600, target_start=0x2, len=0xffffffffffffff90)
    at ../../guile-3.0.0/libguile/bytevectors.c:604
#2  0x00006ffffe743866 in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)

  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/tree-il.go

(gdb) bt
#0  0x000000055a8b1b25 in scm_to_uint64 (val=val <at> entry=0xffffffffffffff90)
    at ../../guile-3.0.0/libguile/conv-uinteger.i.c:44
#1  0x000000055a86b1ea in scm_bytevector_copy_x (source=0x70000055f160, source_start=0x34964a, target=0x700000808c90,
    target_start=0x2, len=0xffffffffffffff90) at ../../guile-3.0.0/libguile/bytevectors.c:604
#2  0x00006ffffe73f936 in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)

  BOOTSTRAP GUILEC language/tree-il/analyze.go

(gdb) bt
#0  0x000000055a8b1b25 in scm_to_uint64 (val=val <at> entry=0xffffffffffffff90)
    at ../../guile-3.0.0/libguile/conv-uinteger.i.c:44
#1  0x000000055a86b1ea in scm_bytevector_copy_x (source=0x700000645160, source_start=0x34964a, target=0x7000008012d0,
    target_start=0x2, len=0xffffffffffffff90) at ../../guile-3.0.0/libguile/bytevectors.c:604
#2  0x00006ffffe753fc6 in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)

^C
#v-

s

Message #58 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39118: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:11:04 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 5:11 PM szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu> wrote:

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 09:23:19AM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> > Aaaand... Cygwin doesn't do core dumps. Under the skin it's WIndows,
> after
> > all.  This is what I get when I specify ulimit -c unlimited and rebuild:
> > [...]
>
> Please see my previous mail on how to get a real core dump on cygwin
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=39118#28


Okay, I looked at that page.  However, Cygwin's dumper requires you to know
the Windows PID of the process to dump.  Clearly it is intended for a
long-running process such as a server process, which you can force to core
dump, as if by "/bin/kill -SIGSEGV pid"; it is not suitable for a process
that gets a segmentation violation for internal reasons.  In any case, when
building, I have no idea of the pid of the process which is dumping; it
starts up and then dumps immediately.



John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan <at> ccil.org
The Penguin shall hunt and devour all that is crufty, gnarly and
bogacious; all code which wriggles like spaghetti, or is infested with
blighting creatures, or is bound by grave and perilous Licences shall it
capture.  And in capturing shall it replicate, and in replicating shall
it document, and in documentation shall it bring freedom, serenity and
most cool froodiness to the earth and all who code therein.  --Gospel of Tux

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #61 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu>
To: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39118: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 23:42:50 +0100

On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 04:11:04PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 5:11 PM szgyg <szgyg <at> ludens.elte.hu> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 09:23:19AM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> > > Aaaand... Cygwin doesn't do core dumps. Under the skin it's WIndows,
> > after
> > > all.  This is what I get when I specify ulimit -c unlimited and rebuild:
> > > [...]
> >
> > Please see my previous mail on how to get a real core dump on cygwin
> > https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=39118#28
> 
> 
> Okay, I looked at that page.  However, Cygwin's dumper requires you to know
> the Windows PID of the process to dump.  Clearly it is intended for a
> long-running process such as a server process, which you can force to core
> dump, as if by "/bin/kill -SIGSEGV pid"; it is not suitable for a process
> that gets a segmentation violation for internal reasons.  In any case, when
> building, I have no idea of the pid of the process which is dumping; it
> starts up and then dumps immediately.


| One common way to use dumper is to plug it into cygwin's Just-In-Time
| debugging facility by adding
| error_start=x:\path\to\dumper.exe
| to the CYGWIN environment variable. Please note that x:\path\to\dumper.exe
| is Windows-style and not cygwin path. If error_start is set this way, then
| dumper will be started whenever some program encounters a fatal error.


s

Message #64 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>, guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 11:53:10 +0100

On Mon 20 Jan 2020 18:22, Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 11:38:35AM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
>> Yes, gladly, but I don't know how to get one in this context.  Do I need to
>> add some flags to the Makefile, and if so, where?  (It's a twisty maze of
>> passages, all different.) . Note that this *is* a build with JIT enabled;
>> when I disable it using the env variable, there are no errors and 3.0.0
>> works fine.
>> 
>> Also, it may take some time, as I have to rebuild my Windows system.
>
> I also tried building Guile 3.0.0 on Cygwin 3.1.x.  The failure comes from
> trying to parse compiled .go files.
>
> The last time that I had this sort of problem, it was because the
> O_BINARY flag was dropped or missing when writing .go files, leading
> to CR+LF characters in the compiled files.  And I diagnosed it by
> byte-comparing Linux-compiled .go files with Cygwin-compiled .go
> files, and by looking for CR+LF combinations in the compiled .go
> files.
>
> I don't know if that is what is happening here, but, I'll check that
> next time I have a chance.

Given that John said that compilation went fine with
GUILE_JIT_THRESHOLD=-1, I think perhaps this problem may have been fixed
in the past.  My suspicions are that this issue is an ABI issue with
lightening that could perhaps be reproduced by:

  git co https://gitlab.com/wingo/lightening
  cd lightening
  make -C tests test-native

Of course any additional confirmation is useful and welcome!

Cheers,

Andy

Message #67 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>, guile-devel <at> gnu.org, Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 20:56:44 -0800

On 2/6/20, Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com> wrote:

> Given that John said that compilation went fine with
> GUILE_JIT_THRESHOLD=-1, I think perhaps this problem may have been fixed
> in the past.  My suspicions are that this issue is an ABI issue with
> lightening that could perhaps be reproduced by:
>
>   git co https://gitlab.com/wingo/lightening
>   cd lightening
>   make -C tests test-native
>
> Of course any additional confirmation is useful and welcome!

I haven't been able to get guile to compile under Cygwin (just a
compilation error I haven't had time to track down), but I was able to
quickly try the above. I get:

Testing: test-native-call_10
call_10.c:9: assertion failed: e == 4
/bin/sh: line 1:  7063 Aborted                 (core dumped) ./$test
make: *** [Makefile:31: test-native] Error 134

Despite what it says about a core dump, I find no such thing. Just a
file with the same name as the executable suffixed with ".stackdump".
(I did attempt to configure the Cygwin dumper before running the
tests.) Unless somebody suggests otherwise, I think the error message
is more useful.

--
Charles

Message #70 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
Cc: 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>, guile-devel <at> gnu.org, Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:46:04 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 2/6/20, Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe> wrote:
> On 2/6/20, Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> Given that John said that compilation went fine with
>> GUILE_JIT_THRESHOLD=-1, I think perhaps this problem may have been fixed
>> in the past.  My suspicions are that this issue is an ABI issue with
>> lightening that could perhaps be reproduced by:
>>
>>   git co https://gitlab.com/wingo/lightening
>>   cd lightening
>>   make -C tests test-native
>>
>> Of course any additional confirmation is useful and welcome!
>
> I haven't been able to get guile to compile under Cygwin (just a
> compilation error I haven't had time to track down), but I was able to
> quickly try the above. I get:
>
> Testing: test-native-call_10
> call_10.c:9: assertion failed: e == 4
> /bin/sh: line 1:  7063 Aborted                 (core dumped) ./$test
> make: *** [Makefile:31: test-native] Error 134
>

Andy, I don't know if you'd want to continue this here or on
lightening's gitlab page, but I looked into this a little bit a few
minutes here and there this past weeek. The x86 "fast-call" calling
convention used on Windows x64[0] and shared by Cygwin[1] requires
that the caller reserve 32 bytes of memory on the stack for the callee
to spill the register parameters (even if the callee takes fewer than
four parameters). I think lightening is currently missing that for the
x64 case for Cygwin.

To test the idea, I made a small modification (patch attached) that is
*not* intended as a solution as it doesn't work for the general case,
but it does allow the tests to pass on Cygwin 64.

[0] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/x64-calling-convention?view=vs-2019
[1] https://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/programming.html#gcc-64

--
Charles

[x86-fastcall-stack-reservation.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #73 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
To: Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>,
 guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 15:23:34 -0800

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 09:46:04AM -0800, Charles Stanhope wrote:
> Andy, I don't know if you'd want to continue this here or on
> lightening's gitlab page, but I looked into this a little bit a few
> minutes here and there this past weeek. The x86 "fast-call" calling
> convention used on Windows x64[0] and shared by Cygwin[1] requires
> that the caller reserve 32 bytes of memory on the stack for the callee
> to spill the register parameters (even if the callee takes fewer than
> four parameters). I think lightening is currently missing that for the
> x64 case for Cygwin.
> 
> To test the idea, I made a small modification (patch attached) that is
> *not* intended as a solution as it doesn't work for the general case,
> but it does allow the tests to pass on Cygwin 64.

I can confirm that Charles's patch, plus another one line patch
to define CPU_SETSIZE, is enough to get Guile 3.0.x to build and run
on my box.  All tests pass except strptime in French, and the absence
of crypt.  This is a 64-bit build.

-Mike Gran

Message #79 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>
To: Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, guile-devel <at> gnu.org,
 Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe>
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 18:24:52 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Excellent, and thank you all!  I've been WIndowsless for a few weeks, but
that should change again soon.

On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 6:23 PM Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 09:46:04AM -0800, Charles Stanhope wrote:
> > Andy, I don't know if you'd want to continue this here or on
> > lightening's gitlab page, but I looked into this a little bit a few
> > minutes here and there this past weeek. The x86 "fast-call" calling
> > convention used on Windows x64[0] and shared by Cygwin[1] requires
> > that the caller reserve 32 bytes of memory on the stack for the callee
> > to spill the register parameters (even if the callee takes fewer than
> > four parameters). I think lightening is currently missing that for the
> > x64 case for Cygwin.
> >
> > To test the idea, I made a small modification (patch attached) that is
> > *not* intended as a solution as it doesn't work for the general case,
> > but it does allow the tests to pass on Cygwin 64.
>
> I can confirm that Charles's patch, plus another one line patch
> to define CPU_SETSIZE, is enough to get Guile 3.0.x to build and run
> on my box.  All tests pass except strptime in French, and the absence
> of crypt.  This is a 64-bit build.
>
> -Mike Gran
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #82 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe>
To: Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>,
 guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 17:08:25 -0800

On 2/16/20, Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 09:46:04AM -0800, Charles Stanhope wrote:
>> Andy, I don't know if you'd want to continue this here or on
>> lightening's gitlab page, but I looked into this a little bit a few
>> minutes here and there this past weeek. The x86 "fast-call" calling
>> convention used on Windows x64[0] and shared by Cygwin[1] requires
>> that the caller reserve 32 bytes of memory on the stack for the callee
>> to spill the register parameters (even if the callee takes fewer than
>> four parameters). I think lightening is currently missing that for the
>> x64 case for Cygwin.
>>
>> To test the idea, I made a small modification (patch attached) that is
>> *not* intended as a solution as it doesn't work for the general case,
>> but it does allow the tests to pass on Cygwin 64.
>
> I can confirm that Charles's patch, plus another one line patch
> to define CPU_SETSIZE, is enough to get Guile 3.0.x to build and run
> on my box.  All tests pass except strptime in French, and the absence
> of crypt.  This is a 64-bit build.

Mike, thanks for going further with the Guile build. The CPU_SETSIZE
issue was what was hanging me up from compiling before Andy's comment
got me to look at lightening. I assumed I had some configuration,
package, or compiler issue. Good to know there's a simple fix.

Just a further warning to anyone watching, that patch I posted is a
real hack job just to test my theory of the cause of the segfault. I
would expect it to fail when you have fewer than four arguments in a
JITed function call. I wouldn't try doing much else with that Guile
build besides run the tests. :)

--
Charles

Message #85 received at 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe>
To: Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>, 39118 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>,
 guile-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 11:27:42 -0800

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 2/16/20, Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe> wrote:
> On 2/16/20, Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> I can confirm that Charles's patch, plus another one line patch
>> to define CPU_SETSIZE, is enough to get Guile 3.0.x to build and run
>> on my box.  All tests pass except strptime in French, and the absence
>> of crypt.  This is a 64-bit build.
>
> Mike, thanks for going further with the Guile build. The CPU_SETSIZE
> issue was what was hanging me up from compiling before Andy's comment
> got me to look at lightening. I assumed I had some configuration,
> package, or compiler issue. Good to know there's a simple fix.
>
> Just a further warning to anyone watching, that patch I posted is a
> real hack job just to test my theory of the cause of the segfault. I
> would expect it to fail when you have fewer than four arguments in a
> JITed function call. I wouldn't try doing much else with that Guile
> build besides run the tests. :)

I had a little bit more time to look into the lightening
implementation last night. I've attached a patch that is less horrible
and more correct than my previous one. It reserves the stack space
regardless of the number of parameters and appears to work. But I'm
new to the lightening code base, so I'm not convinced it is the
correct solution. It's just the solution I was left with after my time
ran out. I wanted to post this patch as a replacement to the prior one
in case people did want to do more testing with Guile 3.0 on Cygwin
x64.

With that, I will let more experienced people come up with the
appropriate solution. Happy hacking, everybody!

--
Charles

[x86-fastcall-stack-reservation-2.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #90 received at 39118-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe>
Cc: John Cowan <cowan <at> ccil.org>,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 39118-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 guile-devel <at> gnu.org, Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Segfault while building on 64-bit Cygwin
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 22:05:45 +0100

Aah, you all are amazing -- thank you!!  Applied and merged.

Cheers,

Andy

On Mon 17 Feb 2020 20:27, Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe> writes:

> On 2/16/20, Charles Stanhope <charles <at> stanho.pe> wrote:
>> On 2/16/20, Mike Gran <spk121 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I can confirm that Charles's patch, plus another one line patch
>>> to define CPU_SETSIZE, is enough to get Guile 3.0.x to build and run
>>> on my box.  All tests pass except strptime in French, and the absence
>>> of crypt.  This is a 64-bit build.
>>
>> Mike, thanks for going further with the Guile build. The CPU_SETSIZE
>> issue was what was hanging me up from compiling before Andy's comment
>> got me to look at lightening. I assumed I had some configuration,
>> package, or compiler issue. Good to know there's a simple fix.
>>
>> Just a further warning to anyone watching, that patch I posted is a
>> real hack job just to test my theory of the cause of the segfault. I
>> would expect it to fail when you have fewer than four arguments in a
>> JITed function call. I wouldn't try doing much else with that Guile
>> build besides run the tests. :)
>
> I had a little bit more time to look into the lightening
> implementation last night. I've attached a patch that is less horrible
> and more correct than my previous one. It reserves the stack space
> regardless of the number of parameters and appears to work. But I'm
> new to the lightening code base, so I'm not convinced it is the
> correct solution. It's just the solution I was left with after my time
> ran out. I wanted to post this patch as a replacement to the prior one
> in case people did want to do more testing with Guile 3.0 on Cygwin
> x64.
>
> With that, I will let more experienced people come up with the
> appropriate solution. Happy hacking, everybody!
>
> --
> Charles
>
> diff --git a/lightening/x86.c b/lightening/x86.c
> index 965191a..bdd26e1 100644
> --- a/lightening/x86.c
> +++ b/lightening/x86.c
> @@ -328,6 +328,10 @@ reset_abi_arg_iterator(struct abi_arg_iterator *iter, size_t argc,
>    memset(iter, 0, sizeof *iter);
>    iter->argc = argc;
>    iter->args = args;
> +#if __CYGWIN__ && __X64
> +  // Reserve slots on the stack for 4 register parameters (8 bytes each).
> +  iter->stack_size = 32;
> +#endif
>  }
>  
>  static void

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.