Here's a wierd problem i ran into with regcomp, using the attached
test program linked against libefence. Am I missing something obvious,
other than the fact that it is a "not-so-correct" regex? Also, the
stranger part is that when the /10 is replaced with /11 (YMMV) the
problem doesn't occur.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <regex.h>
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
regex_t preg;
int r;
char errbuf[512];
r = regcomp(&preg, "127.0.0.1/10", REG_NOSUB|REG_EXTENDED|REG_ICASE);
if ( r != 0 ) {
regerror(r, &preg, errbuf, sizeof(errbuf));
printf("couldn't compile regex pattern, %s\n", errbuf);
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
Program received signal SIGBUS, Bus error.
0x804c5d5 in computematchjumps (p=0xbfbff46c, g=0x28104ea0) at regcomp.c:2048
2048 ssuffix = pmatches[ssuffix];
(gdb) where
#0 0x804c5d5 in computematchjumps (p=0xbfbff46c, g=0x28104ea0) at regcomp.c:2048
#1 0x8048fe8 in regcomp (preg=0xbfbff70c, pattern=0x804da20 "127.0.0.1/10", cflags=7)
at regcomp.c:281
#2 0x8048d08 in main (argc=1, argv=0xbfbff770) at test.c:10
#3 0x8048c5d in _start ()
(gdb) frame 0
#0 0x804c5d5 in computematchjumps (p=0xbfbff46c, g=0x28104ea0) at regcomp.c:2048
2048 ssuffix = pmatches[ssuffix];
(gdb) l
2043 while (suffix <= ssuffix && suffix < g->mlen) {
2044 g->matchjump[suffix] = MIN(g->matchjump[suffix],
2045 g->mlen + ssuffix - suffix);
2046 suffix++;
2047 }
2048 ssuffix = pmatches[ssuffix];
2049 }
2050
2051 free(pmatches);
2052 }
(gdb) print ssuffix
$1 = 4
(gdb) l 2000
1995
1996 /* Avoid making errors worse */
1997 if (p->error != 0)
1998 return;
1999
2000 pmatches = (int*) malloc(g->mlen * sizeof(unsigned int));
2001 if (pmatches == NULL) {
2002 g->matchjump = NULL;
2003 return;
2004 }
(gdb) print g->mlen
$2 = 4
(gdb) print pmatches[0]
$3 = 3
(gdb) print pmatches[1]
$4 = 3
(gdb) print pmatches[2]
$5 = 3
(gdb) print pmatches[3]
$6 = 4
(gdb) print pmatches[4]
Error accessing memory address 0x2810d000: Bad address.
(gdb) print ssuffix
$7 = 4
(gdb)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
