Closed Bug 22015 Opened 26 years ago Closed 26 years ago

Mozilla Page Faults at URL

Categories

(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect, P3)

x86
Windows 95
defect

Tracking

()

VERIFIED DUPLICATE of bug 21918

People

(Reporter: stephena, Assigned: leger)

References

()

Details

(Whiteboard: [TESTCASE])

Attachments

(1 file)

Using build 1999121612, mozilla regularly page faults on the URL. The pagefault dialog box often quotes the fault as occurring in a different DLL each time. I am attempting to pear down the page's HTML and retrieve the pictures and JavaScript locally so I can try to isolate what part exactly is causing the page fault. I am running W95 OSR2 with 128MB RAM.
Severity: normal → critical
As I have been working to isolate the section of the HTML causing the invalid page fault, I have repeatedly been getting: Invalid page fault in Kernel32.dll at 0137:bff9a5d0 If that means anything to anybody...
Component: Browser-General → Javascript Engine
I think it is a JavaScript problem. Down in the middle of the <BODY> section they have the following code: <SCRIPT> function email() { address=document.emailform.emailinput.value; location='http://cnn.com/EMAIL/index.html?'+address; } </SCRIPT> Then they have some more HTML followed by: <SCRIPT>document.write('<FORM name="emailform" onsubmit="email();return false;"><input type="text" name="emailinput" size="10">&nbsp;<input type="submit" value="go"></form>'); </SCRIPT> Now, I've found removal of either of these two script sections stops mozilla from page faulting. BUT, inserting these two sections into a dummy HTML test page do not cause a page fault. There has to be another part to this somewhere in the HTML... I continue looking...
Attached file Testcase
I have created a test case attachment. It's pretty simple - but the problem seems to be pretty complicated. Here's the source of the testcase and what I've discovered: <HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Title</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <TABLE> <SCRIPT> // Blah blah </SCRIPT> <TR> <TD> <SCRIPT> document.write('blah'); </SCRIPT> </TD> </TR> </TABLE> </BODY> </HTML> There are basically two SCRIPT sections planted inside a TABLE. For the invalid page fault to occur, the first SCRIPT section must be placed before the first <TR> for the page fault to occur. It does not seem to matter what the contents of the first SCRIPT section are. The second script section must fall within a proper <TD> </TD> section for the page fault to occur. Moving it out into a <TR> </TR> or out just under the <TABLE> element like the first script section makes the page fault go away. Additionally, it seems the second SCRIPT section must contain a document.write of some type. If you replace it with comments or a function definition, it will not page fault. Now if you're like me your thinking those are a whole lot of specifications to meet for a page fault to occur. Well, yes, but CNN has managed to meet all those conditions. Additionally, I'm getting a fair number of page faults with mozilla during general use. Hopefully this cockroach may lead back to the nest ;)
Whiteboard: [TESTCASE]
I don't know if this bug got created recently (within the last two or three days) or CNN has changed how they're doing their website, but almost every single one of their "Full story" links on their top stories causing this invalid page fault crash. And just as M12 is poking it's head up too.... rats.
Very nice work, stephena@hiwaay.net. Really well broken down. Thanks. ... which is why I'm hesitant in noting it, but, I believe that this is a duplicate of bug #21918, which is also on cnn.com, and has an virtually identical minimum test case. But the good news is that a fix has already been checked in. (Amazingly, it's a one-liner fix -- a typo that never got run until recently).
Thank you for pointing that out. I hope indeed the fix works. The testcase for bug 21918 actually does not cause a crash on my W95 mozilla. For a crash to occur the second SCRIPT with the document.write (as seen in my testcase) must be included in order to prompt a crash. Hopefully that is a OS dependant thing and the fix for the other bug will also fix this nearly identical one. I wish I had seen that bug before writing this one. Oh well.... 3jrgm would you mind taking a look at bug #22026 before I do this all over agian? <grin>
Added karnaze to the cc list so he can comment on whether the fix for bug# 21918 indeed adresses the same issue as this bug.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 26 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Thanks for the test case and making the link to bug 21918. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21918 ***
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: