Re: fsck segfaults on rpi3 running 13-stable
- Reply: bob prohaska : "Re: fsck segfaults on rpi3 running 13-stable"
- In reply to: bob prohaska : "Re: fsck segfaults on rpi3 running 13-stable"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2023 19:31:59 UTC
On Feb 12, 2023, at 11:13, bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 09:21:20AM -0800, Mark Millard wrote:
>>
>> But the debugger inforation/symbols from your system are
>> needed to get symbolic results from that file. My instance
>> of main is not going to be a match.
>>
>> You need to be the one getting the backtrace from your
>> system.
>>
>
> The -current system isn't updated yet, just running buildworld.
> There's no problem regenerating the core dump.
>
> I've gotten as far as
>
> root@www:~ # lldb --core ./fsck_ffs.core
> (lldb) target create --core "./fsck_ffs.core"
> Core file '/root/fsck_ffs.core' (aarch64) was loaded.
> (lldb)
>
> Typing "gui" brings up a curses window, but I've no
> idea what to do next.
>
> Some guidance will be needed to make further progress.
> Is there a beginners's tutorial somewhere?
help in lldb reports:
. . .
bt -- Show the current thread's call stack. Any numeric argument displays at most that many frames. The argument 'all' displays all threads. Use 'settings set frame-format' to customize
the printing of individual frames and 'settings set thread-format' to customize the thread header.
. . .
So typing:
bt all
should attempt to produce a backtrace (of each thread).
(There is both exit and quit to leave lldb.)
I'll note that another option is to run fsck_ffs from
lldb in the first place. The below is running:
"fsck_ffs -n" (which is not really a valid command)
# which fsck_ffs
/sbin/fsck_ffs
# lldb /sbin/fsck_ffs
(lldb) target create "/sbin/fsck_ffs"
Current executable set to '/sbin/fsck_ffs' (aarch64).
(lldb) run -n
Process 8977 launched: '/sbin/fsck_ffs' (aarch64)
usage: fsck_ffs [-BCdEFfnpRrSyZ] [-b block] [-c level] [-m mode] filesystem ...
Process 8977 exited with status = 1 (0x00000001)
(lldb)
So you would use something else than "-n".
Mine, of course, does not stop for the problem, but once
yours does, you could use the "bt all" command.
===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com