Closed Bug 832184 Opened 13 years ago Closed 13 years ago

intermittent null-deref crash [@ nsContentUtils::ContentIsDescendantOf] in test_richtext2.html

Categories

(Core :: DOM: Editor, defect)

defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED WORKSFORME

People

(Reporter: dbaron, Assigned: bugs)

Details

(Keywords: crash, intermittent-failure)

Crash Data

https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=18916703&tree=Mozilla-Inbound Android 4.0 Panda mozilla-inbound opt test mochitest-8 on 2013-01-17 22:49:29 PST for push de2ab911692d slave: panda-0857 hit the following intermittent failure: 393 INFO TEST-START | /tests/editor/libeditor/html/tests/browserscope/test_richtext2.html 394 INFO TEST-PASS | /tests/editor/libeditor/html/tests/browserscope/test_richtext2.html | Clipboard has the correct value INFO | automation.py | Application ran for: 0:00:48.126602 INFO | automation.py | Reading PID log: /tmp/tmpjad3C4pidlog getting files in '/mnt/sdcard/tests/profile/minidumps/' Downloading symbols from: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mobile/tinderbox-builds/mozilla-inbound-android/1358486787/fennec-21.0a1.en-US.android-arm.crashreporter-symbols.zip PROCESS-CRASH | /tests/editor/libeditor/html/tests/browserscope/test_richtext2.html | application crashed [@ nsContentUtils::ContentIsDescendantOf(nsINode const*, nsINode const*)] Crash dump filename: /tmp/tmpzjbSID/3eb58397-515d-d69c-02519c54-6904b51b.dmp Operating system: Android 0.0.0 Linux 3.2.0+ #2 SMP PREEMPT Thu Nov 29 08:06:57 EST 2012 armv7l pandaboard/pandaboard/pandaboard:4.0.4/IMM76I/5:eng/test-keys CPU: arm 0 CPUs Crash reason: SIGSEGV Crash address: 0x10 Thread 11 (crashed) 0 libxul.so!nsContentUtils::ContentIsDescendantOf(nsINode const*, nsINode const*) [nsINode.h : 763 + 0x0] r4 = 0x67901490 r5 = 0x66ebb380 r6 = 0x66eb5dc0 r7 = 0x00000000 r8 = 0x5d7fdf5c r9 = 0x00000000 r10 = 0x00000000 fp = 0x66eb5dc0 sp = 0x5d7fdf20 lr = 0x5f5951f9 pc = 0x5f55310c Found by: given as instruction pointer in context 1 libxul.so!nsRange::ContentRemoved(nsIDocument*, nsIContent*, nsIContent*, int, nsIContent*) [nsRange.cpp : 629 + 0x5] r4 = 0x67901490 r5 = 0x66ebb380 r6 = 0x66eb5dc0 r7 = 0x00000000 r8 = 0x5d7fdf5c r9 = 0x00000000 r10 = 0x00000000 fp = 0x66eb5dc0 sp = 0x5d7fdf20 pc = 0x5f5951f9 Found by: call frame info 2 libxul.so!nsNodeUtils::ContentRemoved(nsINode*, nsIContent*, int, nsIContent*) [nsNodeUtils.cpp : 175 + 0x17] r4 = 0x5f5951c7 r5 = 0x65d6bc00 r6 = 0x65d6bc00 r7 = 0x66ebb380 r8 = 0x5d7fdf5c r9 = 0x00000000 r10 = 0x00000000 fp = 0x66eb5dc0 sp = 0x5d7fdf48 pc = 0x5f58c8af Found by: call frame info 3 libxul.so!nsINode::doRemoveChildAt(unsigned int, bool, nsIContent*, nsAttrAndChildArray&) [nsINode.cpp : 1384 + 0xb] r4 = 0x66eb5dc0 r5 = 0x66ebb380 r6 = 0x00000000 r7 = 0x00000001 r8 = 0x00000000 r9 = 0x00000001 r10 = 0x66ebb3c0 fp = 0x66ebb0f0 sp = 0x5d7fdf90 pc = 0x5f583ee1 Found by: call frame info 4 libxul.so!mozilla::dom::FragmentOrElement::RemoveChildAt(unsigned int, bool) [FragmentOrElement.cpp : 894 + 0xb] r4 = 0x00000000 r5 = 0x66ebb380 r6 = 0x66ebb3b4 r7 = 0x00000001 r8 = 0x63425850 r9 = 0x00000001 r10 = 0x66ebb3c0 fp = 0x66ebb0f0 sp = 0x5d7fdfb0 pc = 0x5f5a870d Found by: call frame info 5 libxul.so!nsINode::RemoveChild(nsINode&, mozilla::ErrorResult&) [nsINode.cpp : 460 + 0x9] r4 = 0x66ebb380 r5 = 0x66eb5dc0 r6 = 0x5d7fdfe8 r7 = 0x66ebcee0 r8 = 0x63425850 r9 = 0x00000001 r10 = 0x66ebb3c0 fp = 0x66ebb0f0 sp = 0x5d7fdfd8 pc = 0x5f58340d Found by: call frame info 6 libxul.so!DeleteNodeTxn::DoTransaction() [DeleteNodeTxn.cpp : 77 + 0x7] r4 = 0x66ebcee0 r5 = 0x63591e6c r6 = 0x5d7fe008 r7 = 0x66ebcee0 r8 = 0x63425850 r9 = 0x00000001 r10 = 0x66ebb3c0 fp = 0x66ebb0f0 sp = 0x5d7fdfe8 pc = 0x5f72b2e7 Found by: call frame info 7 libxul.so!nsTransactionItem::DoTransaction() [nsTransactionItem.cpp : 164 + 0x5] r4 = 0x69197610 r5 = 0x8007000e r6 = 0x5d7fe008 r7 = 0x66ebcee0 r8 = 0x63425850 r9 = 0x00000001 r10 = 0x66ebb3c0 fp = 0x66ebb0f0 sp = 0x5d7fe000 pc = 0x5f7caa31 ...
Hrm this is bad. Does it also affect our users?
(In reply to :Ehsan Akhgari from comment #1) > Hrm this is bad. Does it also affect our users? I was about to say "I can't tell because the Crash Signature field here is empty" when I realized that the summary and comment #0 give it away. ;-) Apparently we're seeing this signature in the wild, but with very low volume: https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/report/list?signature=nsContentUtils%3A%3AContentIsDescendantOf%28nsINode%20const*%2C%20nsINode%20const*%29
Crash Signature: [@ nsContentUtils::ContentIsDescendantOf]
Needs an owner.
Assignee: nobody → bugs
Resolving WFM keyword:intermittent-failure bugs last modified >3 months ago, whose whiteboard contains none of: {random,disabled,marked,fuzzy,todo,fails,failing,annotated,time-bomb,leave open} There will inevitably be some false positives; for that (and the bugspam) I apologise. Filter on orangewfm.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.