Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:26:13 +0900 From: plan9assembler <plan9assembler@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: util-linux-2.23 mount segmentation fault error Hi, thanks for the patch, i tested it. it still gets same segfaults, same bt gdb result. # gdb ./mount /dev/sda1 /mnt r bt and it is clear to me that latest musl libc[2013/05/29] contain new bug, because, below abnormal operation never happened before. (musl version git pulled at 2013/05/03) # ./mount /dev/sda1 /mnt EXT4-fs (sda1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) < 30 - 40 seconds waiting without return to shell> mount: /mnt: filesystem mounted, but mount(8) failedOperation timed out // <-- this is weird. # On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote: > * plan9assembler <plan9assembler@...il.com> [2013-05-30 15:11:09 +0900]: > > here is backtrace of gdb for "./mount /dev/sda1 /mnt" > > > > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > > 0x00007ffff7dd58fb in strlen () from /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 > > (gdb) at > > #0 0x00007ffff7dd58fb in strlen () from /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 > > #1 0x00007ffff79614b6 in unmangle_string (s=0x6164732f7665642f <Address > > 0x616732f7665642 out of bounds>) at ./include/mangle.h:17 > > #2 mnt_parse_table_line (s=0x7fffffffe640 "/dev/sda1 /mnt ext4 rw 0 0", > > fs=0x608f00) at libmount/src/tab_parse.c:78 > > #3 mnt_table_parse_next (tb=tb@...ry=0x7ffff7ffb360, f=f@...ry > =0x608a00, > > fs=fs@...ry=0x608f00, filename=filename@...ry=0x7ffff7973e78 > "/etc/mtab", > > nlines=nlines@...ry=0x7fffffffeab4) at at libmount/src/tab_parse.c:396 > > yes this is the %ms issue i was talking about > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:17 AM, plan9assembler < > plan9assembler@...il.com>wrote: > > > correction: > > > > > > #if 1 > > > #define _IO(a,b) _IOC(0U,(a),(b),0) //? > > > #define _IOW(a,b,c) _IOC(1U,(a),(b),sizeof(c)) //? > > > #else > > > #define _IO(a,b) _IOC(0,(a),(b),0) //ok > > > #define _IOW(a,b,c) _IOC(1,(a),(b),sizeof(c)) //ok > > > #endif > > > > > > #define _IOR(a,b,c) _IOC(2U,(a),(b),sizeof(c)) //ok > > > - #define _IOW(a,b,c) _IOC(3U,(a),(b),sizeof(c)) //ok > > > + #define _IOWR(a,b,c) _IOC(3U,(a),(b),sizeof(c)) //ok > > this does not make sense to me > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:07 AM, plan9assembler < > plan9assembler@...il.com>wrote: > > >> could you send me the patch? i will test it. > > my super sophisticated patch has no warranty > you could do better parsing or wait for musl to support %ms > > Content of type "text/html" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.