Bug 440091

Summary: init segfaults at boot on system upgraded from F8
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Will Woods <wwoods>
Component: mkinitrdAssignee: Peter Jones <pjones>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: rawhideCC: cookiecaper, dcantrell, katzj, lsof, notting, wtogami
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: 2008-04-17 06:29:00 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: 235706    

Description Will Woods 2008-04-01 18:16:01 UTC
I upgraded my system from F8 to rawhide using preupgrade.

At boot I get the following message from init:

init[1]: segfault at d ip 004a266b sp bfa52b60 error 4 in
libc-2.7.90.so[48c000+16d000]

Bootup hangs at this point.

Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2008-04-01 18:17:27 UTC
What happens if you boot with enforcing=0/selinux=0?

If you boot with init=/bin/bash and do:

rpm -V upstart event-compat-sysv

what do you see?
(In reply to comment #0)
> I upgraded my system from F8 to rawhide using preupgrade.
> 
> At boot I get the following message from init:
> 
> init[1]: segfault at d ip 004a266b sp bfa52b60 error 4 in
> libc-2.7.90.so[48c000+16d000]
> 
> Bootup hangs at this point.



Comment 2 Will Woods 2008-04-01 18:27:39 UTC
All combinations of those boot args give slightly different SPs but that's it.

e.g. selinux=0 init=/bin/bash:
init[1]: segfault at d ip 004a266b sp bfacb960 error 4 in
libc-2.7.90.so[48c000+16d000]

Trying to get a working rescue CD so I can poke this machine a bit further.

Comment 3 Bill Nottingham 2008-04-01 19:02:37 UTC
Well, that eliminates upstart as the culprit.

Comment 4 Jeremy Katz 2008-04-01 19:58:46 UTC
Is that init or is it /init  from the initrd (in which case, nash)?

Comment 5 Bill Nottingham 2008-04-01 20:28:44 UTC
Poked at the box. It's the return of the 'mkinitrd chooses mismatching ld.so and
libc' problem.

Comment 6 Jeremy Katz 2008-04-01 23:37:08 UTC
Blargh.  This is because ld-2.7.90.so sorts before ld-2.7.so in shell sort.  But
we don't want to change the sort to be reversed as that would break things for
ld-2.7 -> ld-2.8.  Not really sure if there's any better heuristic to use
off-hand :-/

Comment 7 Bill Nottingham 2008-04-02 15:35:24 UTC
Can't we just readlink ld-linux.so.2?

Comment 8 Jeremy Katz 2008-04-02 15:53:24 UTC
The name isn't consistent across arches...  it's ld-linux-x86_64.so.2 on x86_64,
ld-linux-ia64.so.2 on itanium, ld.so.1 on ppc and ld64.so.1 on ppc64.  I didn't
feel motivated enough to find an s390 or a sparc at that point.  And keeping a
hardcoded list in mkinitrd per-arch feels like loss

Comment 9 Bill Nottingham 2008-04-02 18:21:56 UTC
You don't need a list, you can just ldd something...

Comment 10 Adam Jackson 2008-04-03 18:51:35 UTC
(In reply to comment #9)
> You don't need a list, you can just ldd something...

Like say, the libc you're about to install.

Comment 11 Dave Jones 2008-04-04 01:06:20 UTC
*** Bug 440514 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 12 Dave Jones 2008-04-04 17:07:51 UTC
*** Bug 440583 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13 Need Real Name 2008-04-04 17:17:29 UTC
kernel-2.6.25-0.195.rc8.git1.fc9.i686 wfm

Comment 14 Will Woods 2008-04-04 17:25:47 UTC
Yes, anything that recreates the initrd (e.g. installing a new kernel)
post-upgrade will work fine. 

But the problem happens when you run mkinitrd *during* the upgrade.

Comment 15 Peter Jones 2008-04-07 14:46:22 UTC
Can you test this with 6.0.42 ?  (to be built very soon...)

Comment 16 Jeremy Katz 2008-04-17 06:29:00 UTC
Just did an upgrade from F8 and things are fine now