Bug 453065 - nash gets a SIGSEGV from libc.so.6 when installing the kernel
nash gets a SIGSEGV from libc.so.6 when installing the kernel
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: mkinitrd (Show other bugs)
8
x86_64 Linux
low Severity high
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Peter Jones
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-06-26 21:17 EDT by Peter Williams
Modified: 2009-01-09 01:38 EST (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-01-09 01:38:26 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Output of valgrind -v --leak-check=full calling /sbin/installkernel (13.13 KB, text/plain)
2008-06-27 21:26 EDT, Peter Williams
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Peter Williams 2008-06-26 21:17:43 EDT
Description of problem:

nash gets a SIGSEGV from libc.so.6 when installing the kernel

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

glibc-2.7-2
nash-6.0.19-4.fc8
mkinitrd-6.0.19-4.fc8

How reproducible:

Very.

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Build a kernel.
2. run "make modules_install"
3. run "make install"
4. get SIGSEGV from nash

Actual results:

[peter@mudlark latest-2.6]$ sudo make install
make -C /home/peter/SRC/KERNELS/Vanilla/linux-2.6
O=/home/peter/SRC/KERNELS/Vanilla/build/latest-2.6/. install
sh /home/peter/SRC/KERNELS/Vanilla/linux-2.6/arch/x86/boot/install.sh 2.6.26-rc5
arch/x86/boot/bzImage System.map "/boot"
nash received SIGSEGV!  Backtrace (29):
/sbin/nash[0x40c7c9]
/lib64/libc.so.6[0x3608630f30]
/lib64/libc.so.6[0x3608670813]
/lib64/libc.so.6[0x3608672f3d]
/lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_malloc+0x7a)[0x36086748fa]
/lib64/libc.so.6[0x3608696962]
/lib64/libc.so.6(opendir+0x58)[0x3608696a88]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nash_wrap_opendir+0x26)[0x2aaaaaad5b42]
/usr/lib64/libbdevid.so.6.0.19[0x2aaaaaceee17]
/usr/lib64/libbdevid.so.6.0.19(bdevid_sysfs_find_node+0x49)[0x2aaaaaceefb3]
/usr/lib64/libbdevid.so.6.0.19(bdevid_probe+0x9e)[0x2aaaaacee9db]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(probe_bdevid+0xc8)[0x2aaaaaae241b]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nash_vitals_probe+0x19c)[0x2aaaaaae2828]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19[0x2aaaaaade3a6]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19[0x2aaaaaade52f]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nash_dev_tree_process_bdev+0xdd)[0x2aaaaaadd0fc]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19[0x2aaaaaadd409]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19[0x2aaaaaadd5d2]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nash_dev_tree_add_sysfs_dir+0x3e)[0x2aaaaaadd32e]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nash_dev_tree_populate_from_sysfs+0x1c)[0x2aaaaaadd668]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nashBdevIterNewPoll+0x7d)[0x2aaaaaad8cd3]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19[0x2aaaaaad9036]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nashFindFsByLabel+0x24)[0x2aaaaaad91cf]
/usr/lib64/libnash.so.6.0.19(nashAGetPathBySpec+0x67)[0x2aaaaaad9325]
/sbin/nash[0x408536]
/sbin/nash[0x40c67c]
/sbin/nash[0x40ccb2]
/lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf4)[0x360861e074]
/sbin/nash[0x404179]




Expected results:


Additional info:
Comment 1 Jakub Jelinek 2008-06-27 11:38:27 EDT
That is most probably a memory handling error in nash.  Use some memory
allocation debugger (valgrind, ElectricFence, MALLOC_CHECK_=3, ...).
Comment 2 Peter Williams 2008-06-27 21:26:58 EDT
Created attachment 310491 [details]
Output of valgrind -v --leak-check=full calling /sbin/installkernel

Attached is the output obtained by using valgrind to call /sbin/installkernel
in the kernel source's install.sh.  When the bug occurs the make hangs (with no
apparent CPU activity) and I have to do a control-C to end the process.

I've also noticed that yum update to kernel-2.6.25.4-10.fc8 and
kernel-2.6.25.6-27.fc8 we're only partially successful in that although rpm
thinks they're installed they don't show up in the boot sequence.

I think this is a manifestation of this bug.
Comment 3 Kuba Ober 2008-07-02 01:58:11 EDT
Please flag as dupe of 443332, it's a manifestation of the same problem 
methinks.
Comment 4 Richard W.M. Jones 2008-09-21 13:21:24 EDT
Isn't this also a dupe of bug 426408?
Comment 5 Bug Zapper 2008-11-26 05:55:41 EST
This message is a reminder that Fedora 8 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 8.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '8'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 8's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 8 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Comment 6 Bug Zapper 2009-01-09 01:38:26 EST
Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is 
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further 
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of 
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.