From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6C67385842B for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:44:06 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D6C67385842B Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-22-LIPvyPG-MmC6t5n1Sq87eQ-1; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 08:44:03 -0400 X-MC-Unique: LIPvyPG-MmC6t5n1Sq87eQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2EEA802812; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:44:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.193.187]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BA65C27DB3; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:44:01 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: okay via Gcc-help Cc: okay Subject: Re: What's the possible reason of fclose core? References: Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:44:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: (okay via Gcc-help's message of "Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:45:28 +0800 (CST)") Message-ID: <87sfpyhf1r.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.8 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-help mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 12:44:11 -0000 * okay via Gcc-help: > #0=C2=A0 0x00007faad574d2a7 in raise () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #1=C2=A0 0x00007faad574e67a in abort () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #2=C2=A0 0x00007faad578c4f4 in __libc_message () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #3=C2=A0 0x00007faad5791966 in malloc_printerr () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #4=C2=A0 0x00007faad5791d02 in malloc_consolidate () from /lib64/libc.so.= 6 > #5=C2=A0 0x00007faad5792753 in _int_free () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #6=C2=A0 0x00007faad5782bb9 in fclose@@GLIBC_2.2.5 () from /lib64/libc.so= .6 > > From the above core stack, because i can't see the parameter(file pointe= r, abbrv fp) value of fclose at frame 6, so fp exists the following possib= le condition: > 1) fp is NULL > 2) fp is changed during running time > 3) call fclose(fp) twice continuously=20 > 4) others reason haven't guessed. > > So i want to ask what's the possible condition can cause the above core= ?=20 It can also be the result of some form of heap corruption, say after a heap buffer overflow. Thanks, Florian