0

GDB 7.7 shows more number of backtraces (90) for my core file. It is problem with GDB or core file or stack corruption issue?

(gdb) bt
Python Exception exceptions.ImportError No module named traceback: 
#0  0x00007f422fd04c37 in ?? () from /users/jegan/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
#1  0x0000000000002929 in ?? ()
#2  0x7328203c20746e63 in ?? ()
.......................
......................
#88 0x544143494649544e in ?? ()
#89 0x29295d305b4e4f49 in ?? ()
#90 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
(gdb)
Jegan
  • 188
  • 3
  • 15
  • What do you mean by "more number of backtraces"? More than what? – ks1322 Oct 16 '17 at 15:59
  • It shows 90 backtraces in total, it does't suite with code. Moreover backtrace starts with 0x00000 which is invalid. – Jegan Oct 20 '17 at 13:59

1 Answers1

1

GDB 7.7 shows more number of backtraces (90) for my core file.

There are a few likely causes for this:

  1. You didn't invoke GDB correctly, or
  2. You are analysing a core dump on a different host from the one it was produced on (or the same host has had its system libraries updated).

Answer for #1.
Answer for #2.

Employed Russian
  • 199,314
  • 34
  • 295
  • 362
  • 1) Let me know how to verify whether I invoke GDB correctly or not. 2) It is true that I am running GDB in my dev machine for offline GDB debugging. It is GDB version that comes with cross compiler toolchain. . I used to create sysroot from my box and set the same using "set solib-absolute-prefix". will give input as core file, binary file and new sysroot I got it from affected box. Ideally it was working fine for many core files. It doesn't work only this core file – Jegan Oct 20 '17 at 13:59
  • Is it not possible to do GDB debugging in different host for the given core file? – Jegan Oct 20 '17 at 14:05
  • "1) Let me know how to verify whether I invoke GDB correctly or not" -- how *do* you invoke GDB? "2) It doesn't work only this core file" -- your sysroot is almost certainly incorrect (maybe the machine where the core was produced has been updated after the core was produced, and you are grabbing the wrong (new) binaries from it now). – Employed Russian Oct 20 '17 at 14:24