After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 333678 - atk-bridge panel crash on 64bit arch
atk-bridge panel crash on 64bit arch
Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE
Product: atk
Classification: Platform
Component: atk
unspecified
Other All
: Normal critical
: ---
Assigned To: bill.haneman
bill.haneman
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2006-03-06 23:52 UTC by John (J5) Palmieri
Modified: 2006-03-10 18:04 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.13/2.14


Attachments
reverting this change fixes things for me (286 bytes, patch)
2006-03-09 14:04 UTC, Matthias Clasen
none Details | Review

Description John (J5) Palmieri 2006-03-06 23:52:06 UTC
Steps to reproduce:
1. enable accessibility on a 64bit machine
2. try to log in
3. sit there watching the gnome splash screen do nothing

Steps to reproduce in gdb:

1. log into failsafe xterm with accessibility enabled in gnome
2. start gnome-panel in gdb
3. watch it crash and burn



Stack trace:
0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
  • #0 ??
  • #1 ORBit_free_T
    from /usr/lib64/libORBit-2.so.0
  • #2 ORBit_free
    from /usr/lib64/libORBit-2.so.0
  • #3 gnome_accessibility_module_shutdown
    from /usr/lib64/gtk-2.0/modules/libatk-bridge.so
  • #4 gnome_accessibility_module_shutdown
    from /usr/lib64/gtk-2.0/modules/libatk-bridge.so
  • #5 g_signal_override_class_closure
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #6 g_signal_emit_valist
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #7 g_signal_emit
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #8 atk_object_get_name
    from /usr/lib64/libatk-1.0.so.0
  • #9 g_closure_invoke
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #10 g_signal_override_class_closure
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #11 g_signal_emit_valist
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #12 g_signal_emit
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #13 g_object_class_override_property
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #14 g_object_notify
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #15 panel_toplevel_add_hide_button
    at panel-toplevel.c line 1114
  • #16 panel_toplevel_instance_init
    at panel-toplevel.c line 4050
  • #17 g_type_create_instance
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #18 g_object_set
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #19 g_object_newv
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #20 g_object_new_valist
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #21 g_object_new
    from /usr/lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
  • #22 panel_profile_load_toplevel
    at panel-profile.c line 1604
  • #23 panel_profile_load_and_show_toplevel
    at panel-profile.c line 1728
  • #24 panel_profile_load_list
    at panel-profile.c line 2167
  • #25 panel_profile_load
    at panel-profile.c line 2397
  • #26 main
    at main.c line 87

Other information:
It seems to be a recent release in Fedora rawhide as I have had accessibility on
for awhile now with no problem.  Atk version is 1.11.2.  This only happens on 64
bit machines.  I confirmed this on my laptop and a 64bit desktop machine.  All
32bit machines work fine.
Comment 1 Matthias Clasen 2006-03-08 20:44:29 UTC
Crash does not occurs with 1.7.6; downgrading to 1.7.5 fixes it
Comment 2 John (J5) Palmieri 2006-03-08 23:49:06 UTC
Don't you mean it occurs with 1.7.6?
Comment 3 Matthias Clasen 2006-03-09 03:31:37 UTC
of course. 1.7.5 is fine, 1.7.6 crashes
Comment 4 bill.haneman 2006-03-09 11:13:09 UTC
What signal is being emitted in line #7 of the stack trace?
Comment 5 bill.haneman 2006-03-09 11:15:09 UTC
When you say "version 1.7.X", are you talking about at-spi?  The bug is logged against ATK.... should we move it to at-spi then?
Comment 6 bill.haneman 2006-03-09 11:16:34 UTC
kjartan, the only diff between at-spi 1.7.6 and 1.7.5 is the diff for your leak fix.
Comment 7 Matthias Clasen 2006-03-09 12:47:55 UTC
Sorry, Bill. Yes it was at-spi. Downgrading that from 1.7.6 to 1.7.5 makes the
crashes go away
Comment 8 bill.haneman 2006-03-09 12:51:06 UTC
Matthias, can you confirm that the problem is not seen on 32 bit arch?  1.7.5 has some big leaks, so it's a tough call as to what to release for gnome 2.14.0...
Comment 9 Matthias Clasen 2006-03-09 12:56:47 UTC
I can confirm that 1.7.5 works fine on all the 32bit machines I have used it on.

I hope to find time today to investigate exactly which of the few leak fixes
is causing the problem, that might give some hint as to what is actually going
on...
Comment 10 Matthias Clasen 2006-03-09 14:04:11 UTC
Created attachment 60977 [details] [review]
reverting this change fixes things for me
Comment 11 bill.haneman 2006-03-09 14:19:48 UTC
OW!, we can't revert that one, that's the whole data-freeing codepath!
Comment 12 Matthias Clasen 2006-03-09 14:24:28 UTC
Its your choice. That means no accessible desktop on x86-64
Comment 13 bill.haneman 2006-03-10 12:22:52 UTC
Matthias, it's not my choice; it's everybody's choice, I am only one person and I can't reproduce the problem and know almost nothing about it.  I do know however that reverting the change as suggested in comment #10 would introduce massive leaks, so I doubt the release team would approve.

Could there be something else about your 64 bit setup that explains the differences?  For instance, is it multi-CPU?  There may be problems lurking there.

If you could try divide-and-conquer with the OTHER changes between 1.7.5 and 1.7.6 (note where the ._release flag is set in the at-spi event emission code), we might be able to narrow down the problem.  I'd suggest that we create two patches, which revert different halves of the 'free-ing', to try and determine exactly which kinds of events are leading to your problem on free.  If it's happening with ANY events, then that suggests some deep infrastructure, architectural, or ORB problem, which we're unlikely to fix for 2.14.0.
Comment 14 bill.haneman 2006-03-10 12:29:23 UTC
Oh, and Matthias:

Make sure to update your version of gail.  I think there may have been a gailtoplevel.c fix which is relevant.
Comment 15 Matthias Clasen 2006-03-10 16:42:28 UTC
I will look into this on Monday (I'm at home today and the x86_64 box is in the office...)
Comment 16 bill.haneman 2006-03-10 18:04:52 UTC
Thanks Matthias;  best-case this will be fixed by updating gail.  I'll look at preparing a pair of divide-and-conquer patches for investigation, in case the gail upgrade doesn't fix it.