From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <imun@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtpng2.m.smailru.net (smtpng2.m.smailru.net [94.100.179.3])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0570A445320
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:15:22 +0300 (MSK)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:05:03 +0300
From: Igor Munkin <imun@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <20200722120503.GO18920@tarantool.org>
References: <20200721223242.24467-1-i.kosarev@tarantool.org>
 <1595411169.838162410@f334.i.mail.ru>
 <20200722094653.GL18920@tarantool.org>
 <1595413507.397395465@f430.i.mail.ru>
 <20200722104725.GM18920@tarantool.org>
 <20200722110841.GB25532@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200722110841.GB25532@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3] lua: assert in lua_gettop() in
 case of negative stack size
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Nikita Pettik <korablev@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

Nikita,

On 22.07.20, Nikita Pettik wrote:

<snipped>

> > 
> > For now I see no reason to add even the assert, since Ilya's assumptions
> > are confirmed.
> 
> Which one? Assuming that lua_gettop() returns negative value due
> to spoiled lua state?

Yes, no need to check whether L->base is greater than L->top, it's
already known from the coredump. I doubt this change allows to localize
the problem much closer than now. Let's see customer's user code and
proceed with the investigation.

>  

-- 
Best regards,
IM