[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site
From: |
Vlad Harchev |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Aug 1999 17:54:49 +0500 (SAMST) |
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Vlad Harchev wrote:
>
> > I checked - no 'q' necessary. After detaching, process is unfrozen.
>
> Ok, it seems I was wrong about 'detach'. The process should have
> continued running.
>
> > IMO THIS IS A BUG IN MALLOC!
>
> Maybe it does not really 'hang', but is just very very slow at that point.
> malloc might have returned eventually. Try to step with 's' (and make
> some coffee while waiting for malloc to return).
Stepping without sources is possible only on instructions.
Fredereic, here is another advice - run ltrace. In your case, issue the
following:
ltrace -p PID_OF_LYNX -e malloc -tt
this will print the invokations of malloc's only, with timestamp
with micorseconds. If ltrace didn't display anything (ie no calls of malloc) -
this is definitely a bug.
Otherwise the screen will fill up very quickly with something like
17:35:52.433600 malloc(42) = 0x08227a40
17:35:52.440754 malloc(48) = 0x08227a70
17:35:52.448285 malloc(26) = 0x08227458
17:35:52.455430 malloc(21) = 0x08218238
17:35:52.462900 malloc(26) = 0x08227aa8
17:35:52.470202 malloc(23) = 0x08227ac8
Frederic, do you have that problem when opening that page as main page (ie
lynx http://foobar.com
) or only when 'g'oing to it?
Does waiting for say 1 minute solve the problem (ie slow malloc)?
>[...]
> > May be this should be reported to glibc developers?
> >
> > One more proof: if Frederic waited more than 1 second (IMO he did), the
> > second stack trace would have more than 100,000 entries - IMO stack should
> > have exhausted if no malloc hang was occured!
>
> I don't know where you get that number.
I meant that if the malloc didn't hang, the recursive invokation of the
function will fill up entire available stack very fast - in a pair of
seconds. That's why that number.
> >
> > And I noticed problems with mallocs from differenet vendors when size is
> > smaller than 8 - IMO we witness the same problem.
> >
> > This should be inspected more carefully...
>
> If someone want do nail down this possible libc problem, lynx should not
> be necessary. A much smaller test program that call malloc(7) repeatedly
> should be enough. (Possibly also from a recursive function, if there is
> some interaction between stack and heap memory growth.)
I afraid things are more complicated...
>
> Klaus
>
Best regards,
-Vlad
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, (continued)
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Frederic L . W . Meunier, 1999/08/29
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Klaus Weide, 1999/08/29
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Vlad Harchev, 1999/08/29
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Klaus Weide, 1999/08/29
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Frederic L . W . Meunier, 1999/08/29
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Klaus Weide, 1999/08/29
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Vlad Harchev, 1999/08/30
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Vlad Harchev, 1999/08/30
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Klaus Weide, 1999/08/30
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site,
Vlad Harchev <=
- Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Klaus Weide, 1999/08/30
Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, T.E.Dickey, 1999/08/29
Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, T.E.Dickey, 1999/08/29
Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, T.E.Dickey, 1999/08/29
Re: lynx-dev Lynx 2.8.3.dev8: CPU problems connecting to a site, Vlad Harchev, 1999/08/31