Re: [Oorexx-devel] Guard instruction not getting evaluated properly

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 454-5900

I think the valgrind data has given me a clue, which should be fairly easy
to validate if you have the time to do a little experiment.  Change the
value of the constant MAX_THREAD_POOL_SIZE from 5 to 10 and see if your
program works.  My guess is it will work until you get to a value of 12.  If
that's the case, then I have a fairly good idea on where the problem lies.

Rick

On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Moritz Hoffmann <ant...@gm...> wrote:

> I'll try to install ooRexx 3.2.0 and test it again.
>
> Vagrind is a tool to analyze applications in many ways, primarily it
> is a memory leak finder. I have not used it a lot yet, but it helps
> sometimes a lot. Have a look at http://valgrind.org/ for more
> information. Unfortunately there is no Windows port, so you need to
> run it on Linux.
> Moritz
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Rick McGuire <obj...@gm...>
> wrote:
> > I notice you're running this on a trunk build.  Does this problem occur
> on
> > 3.2.0?
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Moritz Hoffmann <ant...@gm...>
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To figure out what the problem might be I tried to run rexx under
> > > valgrind to test for any semaphore related issues. Here is a summary
> > > of what it found out. I don't know if this is helpful, as I don't
> > > really know how the UNIX semaphores work, but maybe it'll give us a
> > > hint.
> > >
> > >
> > > ==10975== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> > > ==10975==    at 0x416A215: locksem(int, int)
> (SystemSemaphores.cpp:151)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4169796: RxAPIStartUp(int) (RexxAPIManager.cpp:292)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4166BC6: RegRegisterDll(char const*, char const*,
> > > char const*, char const*, unsigned, int) (SubcommandAPI.cpp:786)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4166D52: RexxRegisterFunctionDll
> (SubcommandAPI.cpp:661)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4106E66: Interpreter::processStartup()
> > (Interpreter.cpp:107)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F2C65: SystemInterpreter::processStartup()
> > > (SystemInterpreter.cpp:93)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F2A76: _init() (SystemInitialization.cpp:50)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F2A96: _GLOBAL__I__Z5_initv
> > (SystemInitialization.cpp:59)
> > >
> > >
> > > ==10975== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> > > ==10975==    at 0x416A215: locksem(int, int)
> (SystemSemaphores.cpp:151)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x416BC6A: ResetEventSem(int) (QueuesAPI.cpp:1245)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x416BD0F: create_queue_sem(unsigned)
> (QueuesAPI.cpp:332)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x416C5D9: search_session() (QueuesAPI.cpp:538)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4169801: RxAPIStartUp(int) (RexxAPIManager.cpp:328)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4166BC6: RegRegisterDll(char const*, char const*,
> > > char const*, char const*, unsigned, int) (SubcommandAPI.cpp:786)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4166D52: RexxRegisterFunctionDll
> (SubcommandAPI.cpp:661)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4106E66: Interpreter::processStartup()
> > (Interpreter.cpp:107)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F2C65: SystemInterpreter::processStartup()
> > > (SystemInterpreter.cpp:93)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F2A76: _init() (SystemInitialization.cpp:50)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F2A96: _GLOBAL__I__Z5_initv
> > (SystemInitialization.cpp:59)
> > >
> > >
> > > Several different problems arise in the following block:
> > > ==10975== Syscall param futex(futex) points to unaddressable byte(s)
> > > ==10975== Invalid read of size 4
> > >
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F1A44: RexxSemaphore::~RexxSemaphore()
> > > (ThreadSupport.cpp:221)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410144B: RexxActivity::cleanupActivityResources()
> > > (RexxActivity.cpp:179)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4105D70:
> > > ActivityManager::activityEnded(RexxActivity*)
> > > (ActivityManager.cpp:694)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410487A: RexxActivity::runThread()
> > (RexxActivity.cpp:167)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410491C: activity_thread (RexxActivity.cpp:90)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x417B4FA: start_thread (in
> > /lib/i686/cmov/libpthread-2.7.so)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x438393D: clone (in /lib/i686/cmov/libc-2.7.so)
> > > ==10975==  Address 0x43ff948 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 76
> free'd
> > > ==10975==    at 0x40242EC: operator delete(void*)
> > (vg_replace_malloc.c:342)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4101453: RexxActivity::cleanupActivityResources()
> > > (RexxActivity.cpp:179)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410553A:
> > > ActivityManager::poolActivity(RexxActivity*) (ActivityManager.cpp:445)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4107F92:
> > > InterpreterInstance::poolActivity(RexxActivity*)
> > > (InterpreterInstance.cpp:254)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410483C: RexxActivity::runThread()
> > (RexxActivity.cpp:154)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410491C: activity_thread (RexxActivity.cpp:90)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x417B4FA: start_thread (in
> > /lib/i686/cmov/libpthread-2.7.so)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x438393D: clone (in /lib/i686/cmov/libc-2.7.so)
> > >
> > >
> > > ==10975== Invalid read of size 4
> > > ==10975==    at 0x41075BA: InterpreterInstance::haltAllActivities()
> > > (ListClass.hpp:84)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4107009: Interpreter::haltAllActivities()
> > > (Interpreter.cpp:308)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4167CBC: RxExitClear(int) (RexxAPIManager.cpp:1892)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4183E77: (within /lib/i686/cmov/libpthread-2.7.so)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x40F1A44: RexxSemaphore::~RexxSemaphore()
> > > (ThreadSupport.cpp:221)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410144B: RexxActivity::cleanupActivityResources()
> > > (RexxActivity.cpp:179)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x4105D70:
> > > ActivityManager::activityEnded(RexxActivity*)
> > > (ActivityManager.cpp:694)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410487A: RexxActivity::runThread()
> > (RexxActivity.cpp:167)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x410491C: activity_thread (RexxActivity.cpp:90)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x417B4FA: start_thread (in
> > /lib/i686/cmov/libpthread-2.7.so)
> > > ==10975==    by 0x438393D: clone (in /lib/i686/cmov/libc-2.7.so)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Rick McGuire <obj...@gm...>
> > wrote:
> > > > Not sure I can say where the problem is, though I expect something
> > > > unexpected is happening with the Linux semaphores.  I'm not seeing
> any
> > > > problems with this on Windows, going as high as 100 without problem.
> > The
> > > > semaphoring would be the only platform-specific aspect of the GUARD
> > > > instruction.
> > > >
> > > > Rick
> > > --
> > > Moritz Hoffmann;
> > > http://antiguru.de/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> > > It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> > > just about anything Open Source.
> > >
> >
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Oorexx-devel mailing list
> > > Oor...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> >  It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> >  just about anything Open Source.
> >
> >
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
> > _______________________________________________
> >  Oorexx-devel mailing list
> >  Oor...@li...
> >  https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Moritz Hoffmann;
> http://antiguru.de/
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
>
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
> _______________________________________________
> Oorexx-devel mailing list
> Oor...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Guard instruction not getting evaluated properly

REXX interpreter

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Guard instruction not getting evaluated properly