This bug has been created based on an anonymous crash report requested by the package maintainer. Report URL: http://faf.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com/faf/reports/bthash/8b44e4b9c0da7715d2198e37adfe691e76a468d3/ Crash report email was sent from case_sensitive test suite time: Mon 29 Jul 2019 11:27:43 AM EDT package: sssd-proxy-2.2.0-1.el8 reason: proxy_child killed by SIGSEGV crash_function: _dbus_list_unlink cmdline: /usr/libexec/sssd/proxy_child -d 0xf7f0 --debug-timestamps=1 --debug-microseconds=0 --logger=files --domain PROXY --id 1 executable: /usr/libexec/sssd/proxy_child component: sssd uid: 0 username: root hostname: ci-vm-10-0-155-17.hosted.upshift.rdu2.redhat.com os_release: Red Hat Enterprise Linux release 8.1 Beta (Ootpa) architecture: x86_64 pwd: / kernel: 4.18.0-107.el8.x86_64 abrt_version: 2.10.9 exploitable: :Likely crash reason: Jump to an invalid address :Exploitable rating (0-9 scale): 6 Reports: uReport: BTHASH=8b44e4b9c0da7715d2198e37adfe691e76a468d3 ABRT Server: URL=http://faf.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com/faf/reports/bthash/8b44e4b9c0da7715d2198e37adfe691e76a468d3 ABRT Server: URL=http://faf.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com/faf/reports/12208/ CI Job: https://idm-jenkins.rhev-ci-vms.eng.rdu2.redhat.com/job/sssd-rhel-prod-tier2/job/master/8/ Full Backtrace: could not find '.gnu_debugaltlink' file for /var/cache/abrt-di/usr/lib/debug/usr/libexec/sssd/proxy_child-2.2.0-1.el8.x86_64.debug [New LWP 4770] Error while reading shared library symbols for /usr/lib64/sssd/libsss_util.so: could not find '.gnu_debugaltlink' file for /var/cache/abrt-di/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/sssd/libsss_util.so-2.2.0-1.el8.x86_64.debug Error while reading shared library symbols for /lib64/libbasicobjects.so.0: could not find '.gnu_debugaltlink' file for /var/cache/abrt-di/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libbasicobjects.so.0.1.0-0.6.1-39.el8.x86_64.debug Error while reading shared library symbols for /lib64/libref_array.so.1:
Hi Steeve, Do you know reliable way to reproduce an issue?
No crashes noticed with the latest build sssd-proxy-2.2.0-11.el8
I see this crash again with the latest build time: Fri 23 Aug 2019 04:44:12 AM EDT package: sssd-proxy-2.2.0-16.el8 reason: proxy_child killed by SIGSEGV crash_function: _dbus_list_unlink cmdline: /usr/libexec/sssd/proxy_child -d 0xf7f0 --debug-timestamps=1 --debug-microseconds=0 --logger=files --domain PROXY --id 1 executable: /usr/libexec/sssd/proxy_child component: sssd uid: 0 username: root hostname: ci-vm-10-0-152-197.hosted.upshift.rdu2.redhat.com os_release: Red Hat Enterprise Linux release 8.1 Beta (Ootpa) architecture: x86_64 pwd: / kernel: 4.18.0-136.el8.x86_64 abrt_version: 2.10.9 exploitable: :Likely crash reason: Jump to an invalid address :Exploitable rating (0-9 scale): 6 Reports: uReport: BTHASH=8b44e4b9c0da7715d2198e37adfe691e76a468d3 ABRT Server: URL=http://faf.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com/faf/reports/bthash/8b44e4b9c0da7715d2198e37adfe691e76a468d3 ABRT Server: URL=http://faf.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com/faf/reports/12208/ Bugzilla: URL=https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1734248 CI Job: https://idm-jenkins.rhev-ci-vms.eng.rdu2.redhat.com/job/sgoveas-dev-pipeline/job/newjobs/2/
Hi Pavel, this bug seems to be very similar to one you recently investigated - bz 1752730 backtrace here is: ``` _dbus_list_unlink() _dbus_list_remove_link() _dbus_message_remove_counter() ... ``` How do you think, can we close this bug as a duplicate?
Yes, the backtrace is similar. This actually makes me more confident that the problem is in dbus since we do not do any magic with the dbus message here in sbus_watch_handler. We should mark it as a duplicate, but first - Steeve, does this happen randomly or always?
Ok, the logs didn't reveal any problem in sssd. The last debug message comes from `sbus_watch_toggle` which doesn't call any dbus function. After `sbus_watch_toggle` finish, `sbus_watch_handle` is called since some event occured on file descriptor and this function calls `dbus_watch_handle` which produces this crash. Since the backtrace is similar, I'm marking it as duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1752730
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1752730 ***
*** Bug 1656451 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***