Hi Hal, The compiler version is gcc (GCC) 4.0.2 As you see from the patch - something strange is going on with the compiler(probably). I have a pointer that its value is null, but it still enters the if statement, and doesn't handle it as zero. There are many more places where we have if statements on pointers similar to this case, and this compiler change can be very problematic. Do you/anyone else know about this change in the gcc version? Is this behavior controlled by some flag? Thanks, Yael
-----Original Message----- From: Hal Rosenstock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 1:42 PM To: Yael Kalka Cc: openib-general@openib.org; Eitan Zahavi Subject: Re: [PATCH] Opensm - fix segfault on exit - cont. Hi Yael, On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 04:19, Yael Kalka wrote: > Hi Hal, > > I've noticed that under certain operating systems, Seems more likely like a compiler difference rather than OS difference. Can you mention on which distribution/compiler this made a difference ? > when driver isn't > loaded, the SM still exits with segfault. > The following patch fixes this. > > Thanks, > Yael > > Signed-off-by: Yael Kalka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Index: libvendor/osm_vendor_ibumad.c > =================================================================== > --- libvendor/osm_vendor_ibumad.c (revision 4522) > +++ libvendor/osm_vendor_ibumad.c (working copy) > @@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ osm_vendor_delete( > > /* umad receiver thread ? */ > p_ur = (*pp_vend)->receiver; > - if (&p_ur->signal) > + if (&p_ur->signal != NULL) If this makes a difference, there are other uses of similar syntax which should be changed :-( > cl_event_destroy( &p_ur->signal ); > cl_spinlock_destroy( &(*pp_vend)->cb_lock ); > cl_spinlock_destroy( &(*pp_vend)->match_tbl_lock ); -- Hal _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
