Bug 141770

Summary: constant deadlocks on changing network connectivity
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Colin Walters <walters>
Component: evolutionAssignee: Dave Malcolm <dmalcolm>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhide   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-08-23 17:51:13 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 150221    
Attachments:
Description Flags
evolution backtrace none

Description Colin Walters 2004-12-03 17:47:53 UTC 
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041114 Firefox/1.0

Description of problem:
I swear I filed a bug on this before and we discussed it, but I can't find it.  Anyways, I got a better backtrace from a deadlock.  This seems to happen *very* often now.  Particularly after waking my laptop up from sleep, or changing network connectivity with NetworkManager.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
evolution-2.0.2-4

How reproducible:
Sometimes

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Use evolution
2. Change network?  Wake from sleep?
  

Additional info:
Comment 1 Colin Walters 2004-12-03 17:48:26 UTC 
Created attachment 107850 [details]
evolution backtrace
Comment 2 Dave Malcolm 2005-08-23 00:45:20 UTC 
Looking at the backtrace, thread 12 is waiting to acquire a lock on an IMAP
backend, thread 6 is trying to grab data via SSL from an IMAP backend, thread 5
is also waiting for a lock on the IMAP backend.

My guess is that thread 6's read will never succeed, since its IP address has
changed from under it. I don't know offhand if this will timeout.

Am I right in thinking that the latest rawhide evolution is a bit more robust in
this regard?
Comment 3 Colin Walters 2005-08-23 01:02:10 UTC 
It seems to work much better, yes.  You can probably close this bug.