https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=223718 ------- Comment #21 from matz@novell.com 2006-11-27 12:16 MST ------- The backtrace looked like so: #0 0x0fb8ece0 in *__GI_raise (sig=6) at ./nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:64 #1 0x0fb90620 in *__GI_abort () at abort.c:88 #2 0x10063cb0 in ddxGiveUp () at xf86Init.c:1235 #3 0x1019cacc in AbortServer () at log.c:407 #4 0x1019d258 in FatalError (f=0x101ab350 "Caught signal %d. Server aborting\n") at log.c:553 #5 0x1009a8fc in xf86SigHandler (signo=11) at xf86Events.c:1460 #6 0x00100374 in ?? () #7 0x1018d2d4 in WaitForSomething (pClientsReady=0xffe2b2e0) at WaitFor.c:447 #8 0x20000442 in ?? () #9 0x10043370 in Dispatch () at dispatch.c:383 #10 0x1002558c in main (argc=4, argv=0xffe2ba24, envp=<value optimized out>) at main.c:445 Frame 6 actually was the segfault. The address 0x1018d2d4 contains the return address after the call to TimerForce, which means that the segfault did not happen after the call, but during that call, i.e. somewhere in TimerForce or subroutines, or during access of the address of TimerForce. This seems to match my analysis that the crash is not in the assembler code posted. The asm code is suboptimal (a superfluous test) but not wrong. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.