[Bug backtrace/27147] [GNU/Linux, sparc64] GDB is unable to print full stack trace (got "previous frame inner to this frame" errors)

["mehmetgelisin at aol dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27147

Mehmet gelisin <mehmetgelisin at aol dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mehmetgelisin at aol dot com

--- Comment #25 from Mehmet gelisin <mehmetgelisin at aol dot com> ---
outputs/gdb.fortran/function-calls/function-calls \
  -ex "break 241" \
  -ex "run" \
  -ex "p c_nd" \ http://www-look-4.com/
  -ex "p derived_types_and_module_calls::pass_cart_nd(c_nd)"
+break 241
Breakpoint 1 at 0x4018bc: file function-calls.f90, line 241.
+run
             (2.09999990,3.29999995) http://www.compilatori.com/
           4           5
          23
             (2.09999990,3.29999995)
   3.40000010     http://www.wearelondonmade.com/
           6


Breakpoint 1, function_calls () at function-calls.f90:241
241         deallocate(c_nd%d) ! post_init http://www.jopspeech.com/
+p c_nd
Cannot access memory at address 0x4
+p derived_types_and_module_calls::pass_cart_nd(c_nd) http://joerg.li/

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 
0x0000000000400f93 in derived_types_and_module_calls::pass_cart_nd (c=<error
reading variable: Cannot access memory at address 0xc>) at http://connstr.net/ 
/home/vries/gdb_versions/devel/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.fortran/function-calls.f90:130
http://embermanchester.uk/ 
130             pass_cart_nd = ubound(c%d,1,4)
The program being debugged was signaled while in a function called from GDB.
GDB remains in the frame where the signal was received.
http://www.slipstone.co.uk/ 
To change this behavior use "set unwindonsignal on".
Evaluation of the expression containing the function
(derived_types_and_module_calls::pass_cart_nd) will be abandoned.
http://www.logoarts.co.uk/ 

5b6d1e4fa4fc:

$ ./binutils-gdb/gdb/gdb --data-directory binutils-gdb/gdb/data-directory
-batch a.out -ex "b puts" -ex "r" -ex "bt"
Breakpoint 1 at 0x1021a0 http://www.acpirateradio.co.uk/ 

Breakpoint 1, 0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from
/lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#0  0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from /lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#1  0x000007feffdee2d9 in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt stack?)

At 5b6d1e4fa4fc^: https://waytowhatsnext.com/

./binutils-gdb/gdb/gdb --data-directory binutils-gdb/gdb/data-directory -batch
a.out -ex "b puts" -ex "r" -ex "bt"
Breakpoint 1 at 0x1021a0

Breakpoint 1, 0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from
/lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 https://www.webb-dev.co.uk/ 
#0  0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from /lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#1  0x00000100000007f8 in hello () at test.c:4
#2  0x0000010000000810 in main () at test.c:8
 http://www.iu-bloomington.com/ 
Since this is a 9 -> 10 regression, I'll mark it with the 10.2 milestone.  I
don't plan to look more into it at the moment.

Note: I tried to generate a core file, to be able to analyze further on my
local machine, but I wasn't able to load it.  GDB doesn't find the

5b6d1e4fa4fc:

$ ./binutils-gdb/gdb/gdb --data-directory binutils-gdb/gdb/data-directory
-batch a.out -ex "b puts" -ex "r" -ex "bt"
Breakpoint 1 at 0x1021a0 

Breakpoint 1, 0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from
/lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#0  0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from /lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#1  0x000007feffdee2d9 in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt stack?)

At 5b6d1e4fa4fc^: https://komiya-dental.com/

./binutils-gdb/gdb/gdb --data-directory binutils-gdb/gdb/data-directory -batch
a.out -ex "b puts" -ex "r" -ex "bt"
Breakpoint 1 at 0x1021a0

Breakpoint 1, 0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from
/lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#0  0xffff80010019c63c in puts () from /lib/sparc64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#1  0x00000100000007f8 in hello () at test.c:4
#2  0x0000010000000810 in main () at test.c:8

Since this is a 9 -> 10 regression, I'll mark it with the 10.2 milestone.  I
don't plan to look more into it at the moment.

Note: I tried to generate a core file, to be able to analyze further on my
local machine, but I wasn't able to load it.  GDB doesn't find the

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.