Bug 1431278
| Summary: | ns-slapd killed by SIGSEGV | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Viktor Ashirov <vashirov> |
| Component: | 389-ds-base | Assignee: | wibrown <wibrown> |
| Status: | CLOSED WORKSFORME | QA Contact: | Viktor Ashirov <vashirov> |
| Severity: | urgent | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 7.4 | CC: | mreynolds, nkinder, rmeggins, sgoveas, vashirov, wibrown |
| Target Milestone: | rc | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | 389-ds-base-1.3.6.1-3.el7 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-11-28 11:06:58 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
Hi William, Could you please take a look? Thanks! Is this a dynamic plugin test perhaps? So the problem is that there is a design issue in dynamic plugins, that when I fixed our memory leaks that is now exposed. Dynamic plugins are not safe across multiple threads. We have an open issue here: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49100 The truth is that dynamic plugins have never been safe, and we need to commit to repairing this. I do not believe the fix I have in mind is possible before the 1.3.6 release date. Viktor, is this TET or lib389 suite tests that cause the crash? I'm assuming TET, which means no dynamic plugin tests, but I want to confirm. Thanks It's TET tests that cause the crash. But in the latest build (389-ds-base-1.3.6.1-3.el7) there was no crash. Looks like it was fixed. Build tested: 389-ds-base-1.3.6.1-6.el7.x86_64 No crashes were observed with this build, marking as VERIFIED.
> [ { "address": 139784703787125
> , "build_id": "e5d8782e2fcfaf259b364a8a58ca0480b64c79b6"
> , "build_id_offset": 819317
> , "function_name": "slapi_counter_get_value"
Mark and I have made changes in this area of the code, so is this still possible to reproduce?
(In reply to wibrown from comment #14) > > [ { "address": 139784703787125 > > , "build_id": "e5d8782e2fcfaf259b364a8a58ca0480b64c79b6" > > , "build_id_offset": 819317 > > , "function_name": "slapi_counter_get_value" > > Mark and I have made changes in this area of the code, so is this still > possible to reproduce? I wasn't able to reproduce it anymore with 1.3.7. Closing as WORKSFORME. |
Description of problem: ns-slapd segfaults during full acceptance tests. { "signal": 11 , "executable": "/usr/sbin/ns-slapd" , "stacktrace": [ { "crash_thread": true , "frames": [ { "address": 139784703787125 , "build_id": "e5d8782e2fcfaf259b364a8a58ca0480b64c79b6" , "build_id_offset": 819317 , "function_name": "slapi_counter_get_value" , "file_name": "/usr/lib64/dirsrv/libslapd.so.0.1.0" } , { "address": 139784703649437 , "build_id": "e5d8782e2fcfaf259b364a8a58ca0480b64c79b6" , "build_id_offset": 681629 , "function_name": "plugin_op_all_finished" , "file_name": "/usr/lib64/dirsrv/libslapd.so.0.1.0" } , { "address": 139784703660184 , "build_id": "e5d8782e2fcfaf259b364a8a58ca0480b64c79b6" , "build_id_offset": 692376 , "function_name": "plugin_dependency_closeall" , "file_name": "/usr/lib64/dirsrv/libslapd.so.0.1.0" } , { "address": 139784713010528 , "build_id": "39b96c47cbdd971adc9af682b2dff62198f7e540" , "build_id_offset": 138592 , "function_name": "slapd_daemon" , "file_name": "/usr/sbin/ns-slapd" } , { "address": 139784712947669 , "build_id": "39b96c47cbdd971adc9af682b2dff62198f7e540" , "build_id_offset": 75733 , "function_name": "main" , "file_name": "/usr/sbin/ns-slapd" } ] } ] } Full stacktrace will be attached later since test instance is already gone. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 389-ds-base-1.3.6.1-1.el7.x86_64 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: I'm yet to identify which test case triggers the crash. I'll update the bug later with more details. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: