Closed
Bug 1015341
Opened 11 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
startup crash in KiUserCallbackDispatcher on 32-bit versions of Windows 7 and Vista
Categories
(Core :: Widget, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WORKSFORME
People
(Reporter: u279076, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: crash, Whiteboard: [startupcrash])
Crash Data
This bug was filed from the Socorro interface and is
report bp-55ab279a-2ebf-4c05-bf61-e73d22140516.
=============================================================
0 @0x77bb4ec3
1 ntdll.dll KiUserCallbackDispatcher
2 ntdll.dll KiUserApcDispatcher
3 user32.dll _CreateWindowEx
4 user32.dll CreateWindowExW
5 ole32.dll InitMainThreadWnd()
6 ole32.dll CoVrfNotifyCoInit()
7 shell32.dll kfapi::CCoInitializer::Init()
8 shell32.dll kfapi::CFolderIDListBuilder::GetIDList(_GUID const &,kfapi::KNOWNFOLDER_DEFINITION_EX const &,void *,unsigned long,kfapi::CFolderCache *,_ITEMIDLIST * *)
9 shell32.dll CTSmartObj<_ITEMIDLIST *,CTSmartPtr_PolicyComplete<CTContainer_PolicyCoTaskMem> >::Attach(_ITEMIDLIST * const &)
10 shell32.dll kfapi::CKFFacade::GetFolderIDList(_GUID const &,unsigned long,void *,_ITEMIDLIST * *)
11 shell32.dll SHGetKnownFolderIDList_Internal
12 shell32.dll SHGetFolderLocation
13 shell32.dll SHGetSpecialFolderLocation
14 xul.dll GetShellFolderPath toolkit/xre/nsXREDirProvider.cpp
15 xul.dll nsXREDirProvider::GetUserDataDirectoryHome(nsIFile * *,bool) toolkit/xre/nsXREDirProvider.cpp
16 xul.dll nsXREDirProvider::GetUserDataDirectory(nsIFile * *,bool,nsACString_internal const *,nsACString_internal const *,nsACString_internal const *) toolkit/xre/nsXREDirProvider.cpp
17 xul.dll nsXREDirProvider::GetUserAppDataDirectory(nsIFile * *) toolkit/xre/nsXREDirProvider.h
18 xul.dll XREMain::XRE_mainInit(bool *) toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp
19 xul.dll XREMain::XRE_main(int,char * * const,nsXREAppData const *) toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp
20 xul.dll XRE_main toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp
21 firefox.exe do_main browser/app/nsBrowserApp.cpp
22 firefox.exe NS_internal_main(int,char * *) browser/app/nsBrowserApp.cpp
23 firefox.exe wmain toolkit/xre/nsWindowsWMain.cpp
24 firefox.exe __tmainCRTStartup f:/dd/vctools/crt_bld/self_x86/crt/src/crtexe.c:552
25 kernel32.dll BaseThreadInitThunk
26 ntdll.dll __RtlUserThreadStart
27 ntdll.dll _RtlUserThreadStart
=============================================================
More reports: https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/report/list?product=Firefox&signature=KiUserCallbackDispatcher
This signature has been around for a really long time but something recently has caused this to spike. I first noticed it today when looking at the Firefox 31 explosiveness report. It went from between 10 to 120 reports a day for the previous 10 days to over 500 reports on 2014-05-22.
Source:
https://crash-analysis.mozilla.com/rkaiser/2014-05-22/2014-05-22.firefox.31.explosiveness.html
Current Volume:
Firefox 29 - #26 @ 0.48% with 3054 crashes
Firefox 30 - #28 @ 0.45% with 958 crashes
Firefox 31 - #8 @ 1.07% with 95 crashes (up 24 positions in a week)
Firefox 32 - no rank, only 3 crashes
I'm filing this report to investigate what might have caused this spike recently. Given the long history of this crash I'm wondering if there is some external event which might be triggering this, like a Windows update perhaps?
Here are the module correlations:
97% (525/539) vs. 58% (69563/120499) DWrite.dll
100% (539/539) vs. 74% (88603/120499) lpk.dll
100% (538/539) vs. 77% (92481/120499) winnsi.dll
100% (538/539) vs. 77% (92491/120499) IPHLPAPI.DLL
100% (538/539) vs. 78% (93521/120499) powrprof.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 70% (83828/120499) samcli.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 70% (83867/120499) wkscli.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 70% (83868/120499) netutils.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 70% (83869/120499) srvcli.dll
100% (538/539) vs. 78% (94006/120499) dwmapi.dll
100% (538/539) vs. 78% (94024/120499) nsi.dll
100% (539/539) vs. 78% (94260/120499) firefox.exe
100% (539/539) vs. 79% (94874/120499) dbghelp.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 71% (86126/120499) devobj.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 72% (86265/120499) CRYPTBASE.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 72% (86279/120499) sechost.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 72% (86279/120499) KERNELBASE.dll
91% (493/539) vs. 72% (87156/120499) cfgmgr32.dll
100% (539/539) vs. 84% (101390/120499) msctf.dll
6% (34/539) vs. 1% (1485/120499) sysfer.dll
Bsmedberg mentioned on IRC that this could be related to malware. Unfortunately, there is nothing really actionable in the comments. The majority are just complaints that they can't start Firefox.
Updated•11 years ago
|
Group: core-security
Comment 3•11 years ago
|
||
Right now this looks mainly like a FF31 issue so tracking for that version but we've got nothing here that makes this a driver for a 29.0.2 this late in the cycle, and without a significant volume on FF30 there's no need to track/block there either. If there is any way to reach out to users who are experiencing this crash and get them to try safe mode or get lists of addons to look for correlations that might get us something to start with.
Updated•11 years ago
|
Comment 4•11 years ago
|
||
I don't think this is a topcrash any more, but this crash signature is still steadily showing up in the top 50. Currently at 342/66523 crashes for 31.0b in the last 7 days.
It hasn't show up at all for Firefox 32 or 33.
Keywords: topcrash-win → crash
There are 894 crashes in the last week on Beta which makes it #33 currently and has a Crashes per Install value of nearly 1:1. Given this is a startup crash it might be worth tracking as it may prevent people from running/updating Firefox, though I'm not sure what we can do about this.
This is only happening on 32-bit versions of Windows 7 and Vista.
The stacks look like this:
<garbage code address>
user32!__fnINLPCREATESTRUCT+0x8b
ntdll!KiUserCallbackDispatcher+0x2e
The garbage address matches the call target (call dword ptr [esi+5Ch]), so we jumped directly there.
I was stepping through __fnINLPCREATESTRUCT on my own machine, and I noticed that the code used different field offsets even though I had exactly the same Windows branch and build timestamp as the dump [1]. The dump was native 32-bit, and my machine was 32-bit WOW64. So it seems that internal user32 data structures can be different between native 32-bit and emulated 32-bit.
I bet there's some external code poking around whose authors didn't bother testing native 32-bit.
[1] https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/report/index/b34f7c07-2a84-4943-8396-a9b682140626
So far this signature is not showing up for 31.0b99 or 31.0, bug 1035534 and bug 1035537 are still there in significant volume though.
Updated•11 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [startupcrash]
Updated•11 years ago
|
Summary: startup crash in KiUserCallbackDispatcher → startup crash in KiUserCallbackDispatcher on 32-bit versions of Windows 7 and Vista
Comment 9•10 years ago
|
||
still #2 crash
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk, use Needinfo for questions) from comment #9)
> still #2 crash
NOT. posted in wrong bug
| Reporter | ||
Comment 11•10 years ago
|
||
Latest Firefox release has 12 crashes reported in the last week.
Latest Thunderbird has 2506 crashes reported in the last week.
Based on these stats I'm marking this as a topcrash for Thunderbird. This is basically a non-issue for Firefox but we should prioritize investigation for Thunderbird. Unfortunately none of the recent reports have yielded any more leads.
Keywords: topcrash-thunderbird
Comment 12•10 years ago
|
||
Yeah, I've been following both products and there is certainly a divergence.
Thus, Thunderbird related crashes are being tracked in bug 1111861.
Keywords: topcrash-thunderbird
| Reporter | ||
Comment 13•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk, use Needinfo for questions) from comment #12)
> Yeah, I've been following both products and there is certainly a divergence.
> Thus, Thunderbird related crashes are being tracked in bug 1111861.
Well I don't see a point in tracking this for Firefox based on volume. If there's nothing to be done in this bug report I suggest we just close it and focus investigation for Thunderbird in bug 1111861 in that case.
Updated•10 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•