From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59294) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RxzFs-0001h0-V8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 06:12:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RxzFr-0004kC-Ro for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 06:12:04 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64377) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RxzFr-0004k2-Jw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 06:12:03 -0500 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1GBC2Hi026270 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 06:12:02 -0500 Message-ID: <4F3CE552.9000903@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:15:30 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20120215015959.27405.46578.malonedeb@soybean.canonical.com> <4F3CDBA8.1090407@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Bug 932487] [NEW] win32: git rev 59f971d crashes when accessing disk (coroutine issue) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am 16.02.2012 12:01, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > On 02/16/2012 11:34 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> Remember that I saw a similar crash a while ago? It was definitely a >> NULL pointer access somewhere inside SwitchToFiber. I can't remember >> exactly what came out of it, but I think you and Paolo couldn't >> reproduce it and I ran out of time for debugging win32 stuff. >> >> If I was to debug this, the first thing I would try is that I would dump >> co->fiber (or actually I seem to remember it was some data structure >> that is only pointed to by a field in co->fiber) immediately after the >> coroutine is created (I think it was still okay then) and set a >> watchpoint on it. > > IIRC the problem was that thread-local storage was not thread-local at all. Ah, right. And we didn't introduce a workaround, so I guess this is the same thing. Do newer mingw versions get this right or were you just lucky and we should look for some kind of workaround? Kevin