Bug 64809 - C++ exception handler segfaults
Summary: C++ exception handler segfaults
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: libstdc++   
(Show other bugs)
Version: 7.2
Hardware: i386 Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jakub Jelinek
QA Contact:
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2002-05-13 02:54 UTC by Matthew Saltzman
Modified: 2008-05-01 15:38 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2002-12-15 20:16:31 UTC
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Example code illustrating bug (113.92 KB, application/x-gzip)
2002-05-13 02:57 UTC, Matthew Saltzman
no flags Details

Description Matthew Saltzman 2002-05-13 02:54:56 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020408

Description of problem:
Throwing user-defined exception causes segfault.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.96-98

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Unpack attached example and cd into directory.
2. make
3. make unitTest
4. ./Linux-g/unitTest

Actual Results:  Prints:

Testing OsiPackedMatrix
Segmentation fault

DDD reports:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x400bb459 in __cp_pop_exception (p=0x400bb38c) from

Expected Results:  Shoud print:

Testing OsiPackedMatrix
Error Thrown: 1

Additional info:

By "always reproducible, I mean with the attached code, not with any code.

The attached example contains a fairly large amount of code.  The execution path
is actually quite short, however this bug seems to be highly location-dependent.
 Deleting any of the other object files that are included causes the bug to not
be exercised.

The problem occurs with gcc-c++-2.96-98. The Valhalla compiler gcc-c++-2.96-110
does not exhibit the problem on this code, however I did not see any indication
that a problem like this was fixed.  gcc-2.95.3 also does not exhibit the
problem.  It is possible that other differences in these compilers move things
around so that the bug is simply not exercised.

Comment 1 Matthew Saltzman 2002-05-13 02:57:23 UTC
Created attachment 57024 [details]
Example code illustrating bug

Comment 2 Alan Cox 2002-12-15 20:16:31 UTC
Verified ok with 3.2 on 8.0

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.