This bug has been copied from bug #922671 and has been proposed to be backported to 6.3 z-stream (EUS).
Created attachment 718027 [details] 6.3.z-bz929100-1-Put-handle-to-hdb-in-dispatch-on-unknown-message Put handle to hdb in dispatch on unknown message When we receive unknown dispatch type, we should put handle to hdb, because it was correctly obtained. This problem is only cfg and confdb libraries, cpg, evs, quorum, ... are not affected and works correctly. Signed-off-by: Jan Friesse <jfriesse> Reviewed-by: Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto>
Created attachment 718028 [details] 6.3.z-bz929100-2-Properly-check-result-of-coroipcc_dispatch_put Properly check result of coroipcc_dispatch_put When result of coroipcc_dispatch_put it can happen, that one message is delivered to user application multiple times. Signed-off-by: Jan Friesse <jfriesse> Reviewed-by: Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto>
Created attachment 718029 [details] 6.3.z-bz929100-3-coroipcs-Ensure-rb-data-are-not-overwritten coroipcs: Ensure rb data are not overwritten With introduce of rb alignment (55600762), it's not enough to subtract one from number of free bytes, but also alignment must be taken to account. Easiest solution is to subtract 9 bytes. Signed-off-by: Jan Friesse <jfriesse> Reviewed-by: Steven Dake <sdake>
Created attachment 718030 [details] 6.3.z-bz929100-4-Properly-lock-pending_semops Properly lock pending_semops pending_semops variable can be changed in two threads. One is actual IPC connection and second is coropoll. It's really scholar example of race (one thread doing i++, second doing i--). If socket is full, it can happen that IPC will increase value and coropoll will decrease, resulting in unpredictable value. This means, that client IPC can be informed about more messages then really available, resulting in reading of garbage messages in library dispatch function. Solution is to properly lock variable. Signed-off-by: Jan Friesse <jfriesse> Reviewed-by: Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto>
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-0731.html