[#30995] [Bug #3523] win32 exception c0000029 on exit using fibers — B Kelly <redmine@...>

Bug #3523: win32 exception c0000029 on exit using fibers

19 messages 2010/07/02

[#31100] [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Ricardo Panaggio <panaggio.ricardo@...>

Hello,

26 messages 2010/07/07
[#31148] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...> 2010/07/09

> As this it my first patch to Ruby, I don't know where to begin with.

[#31320] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Ricardo Panaggio <panaggio.ricardo@...> 2010/07/16

Sorry for leaving this thread for so long. I've tried to finish the

[#31322] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2010/07/16

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 06:55:35AM +0900, Ricardo Panaggio wrote:

[#31324] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Caleb Clausen <vikkous@...> 2010/07/17

NB: I am Ricardo's mentor for this project.

[#31331] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Benoit Daloze <eregontp@...> 2010/07/17

On 17 July 2010 06:00, Caleb Clausen <vikkous@gmail.com> wrote:

[#31332] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Caleb Clausen <vikkous@...> 2010/07/17

On 7/17/10, Benoit Daloze <eregontp@gmail.com> wrote:

[#31138] Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>

Hi!

14 messages 2010/07/08
[#31146] Re: Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/07/09

(2010/07/09 7:04), Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#31149] Re: Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2010/07/09

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 06:20, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#31150] Re: Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/07/09

(2010/07/09 18:28), Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#31217] [Bug #3562] regression in respond_to? — Aaron Patterson <redmine@...>

Bug #3562: regression in respond_to?

14 messages 2010/07/12

[#31269] [Bug #3566] memory leak when spawning+joining Threads in a loop — Eric Wong <redmine@...>

Bug #3566: memory leak when spawning+joining Threads in a loop

14 messages 2010/07/13

[#31399] [Backport #3595] Theres no encoding to differentiate a stream of Binary data from an 8-Bit ASCII string — Dreamcat Four <redmine@...>

Backport #3595: Theres no encoding to differentiate a stream of Binary data from an 8-Bit ASCII string

17 messages 2010/07/21

[#31459] [Bug #3607] [trunk/r28731] Gem.path has disappeared? — Ollivier Robert <redmine@...>

Bug #3607: [trunk/r28731] Gem.path has disappeared?

22 messages 2010/07/23

[#31519] [Bug #3622] Net::HTTP does not wait to send request body with Expect: 100-continue — Eric Hodel <redmine@...>

Bug #3622: Net::HTTP does not wait to send request body with Expect: 100-continue

9 messages 2010/07/28

[ruby-core:31555] [Bug #1388] cygwin-1.7, gcc4-4.3, and ruby-1.9. make btest #236 test_io.rb Segmentation fault

From: neomjp neomjp <redmine@...>
Date: 2010-07-30 19:54:48 UTC
List: ruby-core #31555
Issue #1388 has been updated by neomjp neomjp.


Hi,

After a long hiatus, I checked the status of this make btest, test_io.rb, segfault bug.

In trunk,

ruby-1.9.2-r23198 segfault (<- when this bug was reported.)
ruby-1.9.2-preview1 (r24184) segfault
ruby-1.9.2-preview2 (r24782) segfault
ruby-1.9.3-r27622 segfault
ruby-1.9.3-r27623 timeout or pass but no segfault (<- fix for test_io.rb
megacontent-copy_stream deadlock)
ruby-1.9.3-r28731 timeout or pass but no segfault

In ruby_1_9_2 branch,

ruby-1.9.2-preview3 (r28108) Too many "[BUG] pthread_mutex_unlock : Operation not permitted
(EPERM)" errors. Not sure if this segfault occurs.
ruby-1.9.2-r28508 timeout or pass but no segfault (<- fix for pthread bug)
ruby-1.9.2-rc1 (r28522) timeout or pass but no segfault
ruby-1.9.2-rc2 (r28613) timeout or pass but no segfault
ruby-1.9.2-r28724 timeout or pass but no segfault

In ruby_1_9_1 branch,

ruby-1.9.1-p429 (r28522) segfault
ruby-1.9.1-r28641 segfault

So, this segfault was seen only before the test was changed in r27623. After the
fix, the test will either pass, or timeout as show below:

#246 test_io.rb: 
       at_exit { p :foo }
   
       megacontent = "abc" * 12345678
       #File.open("megasrc", "w") {|f| f << megacontent }
   
       Thread.new { sleep rand*0.2; Process.kill(:INT, $$) }
   
       r1, w1 = IO.pipe
       r2, w2 = IO.pipe
       t1 = Thread.new { w1 << megacontent; w1.close }
       t2 = Thread.new { r2.read; r2.close }
       IO.copy_stream(r1, w2) rescue nil
       w2.close
       r1.close
       t1.join
       t2.join
       #=> killed by SIGKILL (signal 9) (timeout)  megacontent-copy_stream
FAIL 1/925 tests failed
make: *** [yes-btest] Error 1

What happens when it timeouts? When this test was isolated in a file and executed, it
sometimes showed a hang (or deadlock?). Maybe, the pipes were not properly killed?

1. I do not see a segfault any more. I see a pass or timeout (a hang or deadlock, meaning the
pipes were not properly killed) instead.
2. r27623 may be ported also to ruby_1_9_1 branch. It would turn the second test failure
reported in Bug #3292 [ruby-core:30238] from a segfault into a timeout.
3. The patch for ruby.c in [ruby-core:23255] was incorporated in r23468.
4. The declarations in strftime.c that the patch in [ruby-core:23241] [Bug #1388] tried to
fix were removed in r28592. So, the patch is no more valid.
5. As for maintainership, I would be glad if I could be of some help, but I do not think I
can promise to keep the 3 months rule in [ruby-core:25764]. Sometimes, I can compile ruby and
run tests, but other times, my daily work will not allow me the time. I should better remain
just another cygwin tester.
----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/1388

----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

In This Thread

Prev Next