From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 27 13:13:56 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9291916A4E1; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:13:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (eva.fit.vutbr.cz [147.229.10.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6A143D49; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:13:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (envelope-from xdivac02@eva.fit.vutbr.cz) (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k6RDDkuq081433 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:13:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from xdivac02@localhost) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (8.13.7/8.13.3/Submit) id k6RDDiEM081430; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:13:44 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:13:44 +0200 From: Divacky Roman To: John Baldwin Message-ID: <20060727131344.GA81122@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> References: <44C39D7E.30102@mail.web.am> <200607241720.36606.jhb@freebsd.org> <20060725101729.GA13468@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <200607251230.39953.jhb@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200607251230.39953.jhb@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.54 on 147.229.10.14 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Gaspar Chilingarov Subject: Re: Are there any beakage of linuxulator (on amd64)? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:13:56 -0000 > > this thursday at work I'll try to provide some more info, what exaclty do you > > need? is what -DDEBUG prints enough? > > Probably. The changes in question were just in the linux semctl function, so you > really only need printf's for that function to figure out which case it is blowing > up one and why. soooo.... I checked the coredump and found this: 1) its not acroread what coredumps but bash binary (the binary used for the script) when I manually tried running the bash and "exec /bin/ls" etc. it worked I havent investigated further waht causes the coredump 2) I put printf() at the very begining of the linux_semctl() function and ran the acroread binary. The printf was not printed (ie. it didnt used the linxu_semctl function) 3) here is a outpuit od -DDEBUG compiled linuxolator and running of acroread (the first 3 lines are output of command line, it might be interesting to see the VA = 0x0) www.stud.fit.vutbr.cz/~xdivac02/linuxamd64 if you needed anything else tell me.. I am going to work this monday again roman