I didn't get from your earlier message that provoking the crash is as easy as running the expression below, but I am indeed able to replicate the problem immediately.
Also, I have been swamped for the last couple of weeks, but I should be able to get to this soon. Thanks! At Wed, 15 May 2013 13:40:04 +0100, Matthew Eric Bassett wrote: > This is related to > http://www.mail-archive.com/users@racket-lang.org/msg17597.html. Forgive > me for posting it again, I wanted to make sure it didn't disappear into > a black hole. > > Launching a racket thread that calls make-keyword-procedure may produce > a seg fault. For instance, > > (let loop () (thread (make-keyword-procedure (lambda (x y) '()))) > (loop)) > > Reliably causes a seg fault. Repeatedly calling > > (thread (make-keyword-procedure (lambda (x y) '()))) > > will eventually (but not consistently) produce a seg fault. Functions > defined with make-keyword-procedure, such as const and thunk* suffer the > same fate (plain ol' thunk is fine). > > A coredump of the racket repl from this segfault shows a stack overflow > in scheme_uncopy_stack, with the Scheme_Jumpup_Buf zeroed out. Please > see our gdp session at http://pastebin.com/aBx2FTcK (This is from racket > compiled without optimization) or cause your own seg fault with the > above code. > > Perhaps we're being incredibly daft to write code where we'd need to > const or thunk* something inside a thread, or perhaps this is a bug in > racket. We might just be incredibly daft by calling a const inside a > thread, or this is a bug in racket, or something else is up. In any > case, we've exhausted our abilities to investigate it further and would > appreciate advice from those more familiar with the code. > > Regards, > > -- > Matthew Eric Bassett | http://mebassett.info > _________________________ > Racket Developers list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
