> On Jun 22, 2015, at 4:27 PM, Joshua M. Clulow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 22 June 2015 at 15:47, Ryan Zezeski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Do you have core files for this failure:
>>> Assertion failed: ucp != NULL, file ../common/lx_brand.c, line 797
>> Unfortunately I do not see any cores from around the time that happened.
>> In fact, I feel like it didn't create a core, is that possible? I
>> remember the process never actually died. I have global cores enabled
>> and see cores for other crashes.
>>
>> Looking in my notes I see that when the assert tripped the test runner
>> process started spinning in __sigaction() and never returned. I had a
>> pstack of this moment but deleted it...sigh.
>
> It's possible that the SIGABRT generated by the assertion was being
> (mis)handled by the runtime. This would not be the first managed code
> environment to obscure an assertion with a SIGABRT handler.
>
> You could try setting LX_NO_ABORT_HANDLER in the environment, which
> will silently ignore the attempt to install a SIGSEGV or SIGABRT
> handler from Linux code. Mono may require SIGSEGV for NULL
> dereference exceptions, though, if it's similar to the JDK; you might
> need to patch the LX brand signal code. You should be able to rebuild
> and lofs mount "lx_brand.so.1" without needing to regenerate the
> entire platform image and reboot.
LX_NO_ABORT_HANDLER — that is just friggin’ awesome!
- Garrett
-------------------------------------------
smartos-discuss
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184463/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/25769125-55cfbc00
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=25769125&id_secret=25769125-7688e9fb
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
