Full_Name: Sven Hartge Version: 2.4.28 OS: Debian Squeeze URL: Submission from: (NULL) (2a01:198:329:1::14) I experience an easy to reproduce and consistent segfault when I setup a slapd syncrepl consumer on Squeeze. This segfault always happens during the replication of the same object, but the slapd version in Lenny has no problems with same DIT. My oldstable replicas currently run a self-backported version of 2.4.21-1~dvz50+1, but both 2.4.17-2.1~bpo50+1 and 2.4.11-1+lenny2.1 are also fine. 2.4.23-7.2 shows the segfault as all versions up to 2.4.28-1.1 do. Even if I disable all indices and strip my configuration to the bare minimum needed (i.e. self-defined objectclasses and attributes) I get the segfault. I also did da -O0 rebuild of the Debian-2.4.28 and this also segfaults in the same way as 2.4.23 did. I have yet to test the latest RelEng24 from GIT, but I wanted to submit this issue so someone may have a look at the backtrace in parallel to my further tests. I am aware the problem my lie in my self-defined objectclasses and attributes, but then slapd should throw an error and exit instead of replicating 1/3 of the DIT and then segfault. I get a very good backtrace, but since this backtrace contains internal information I am a bit hesitant to attach this backtrace to a public bug-report. Is there a way to privatly submit this data (backtrace and additional schemas) so you can have look at the problem?
sven@svenhartge.de wrote: > Full_Name: Sven Hartge > Version: 2.4.28 > OS: Debian Squeeze > URL: > Submission from: (NULL) (2a01:198:329:1::14) > > > I experience an easy to reproduce and consistent segfault when I setup a slapd > > syncrepl consumer on Squeeze. > > > > This segfault always happens during the replication of the same object, but the > > slapd version in Lenny has no problems with same DIT. > I get a very good backtrace, but since this backtrace contains internal > > information I am a bit hesitant to attach this backtrace to a public bug-report. The backtrace you sent shows the crash at a line of code which was already patched in RE24 due to ITS#7132. I believe this bug is already fixed. > Is there a way to privatly submit this data (backtrace and additional schemas) > > so you can have look at the problem? -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
changed notes changed state Open to Feedback
On 02/01/12 05:56, Howard Chu wrote: > sven@svenhartge.de wrote: >> I get a very good backtrace, but since this backtrace contains internal >> information I am a bit hesitant to attach this backtrace to a public >> bug-report. > > The backtrace you sent shows the crash at a line of code which was > already patched in RE24 due to ITS#7132. I believe this bug is already > fixed. This is good news. Do you have any commit ID so I can try to backport this fix to the version currently in Debian Squeeze? Grüße, Sven.
Sven Hartge wrote: > On 02/01/12 05:56, Howard Chu wrote: >> sven@svenhartge.de wrote: > >>> I get a very good backtrace, but since this backtrace contains internal >>> information I am a bit hesitant to attach this backtrace to a public >>> bug-report. >> >> The backtrace you sent shows the crash at a line of code which was >> already patched in RE24 due to ITS#7132. I believe this bug is already >> fixed. > > This is good news. Do you have any commit ID so I can try to backport > this fix to the version currently in Debian Squeeze? commit 42faa8393e6cd41a837b526777110b892541773a -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
Um 01:00 Uhr am 01.02.12 schrieb Howard Chu: > Sven Hartge wrote: >> On 02/01/12 05:56, Howard Chu wrote: >>> sven@svenhartge.de wrote: >> > > I get a very good backtrace, but since this backtrace contains internal >> > > information I am a bit hesitant to attach this backtrace to a public >> > > bug-report. >> > >> > The backtrace you sent shows the crash at a line of code which was >> > already patched in RE24 due to ITS#7132. I believe this bug is already >> > fixed. >> >> This is good news. Do you have any commit ID so I can try to backport >> this fix to the version currently in Debian Squeeze? > > commit 42faa8393e6cd41a837b526777110b892541773a This simple patch applies flawless on 2.4.23 but still segfaults. Will try on top of 2.4.28 tomorrow, backtraces will follow then, after I verified my findings. (Reason for trying this on top of 2.4.23 is because this is the version in Debian Squeeze and I want to provide the DDs with a fix for Squeeze. I fully understand that is not supported by OpenLDAP.) Grüße, Sven.
--On Wednesday, February 01, 2012 10:27 PM +0000 sven@svenhartge.de wrote: > Um 01:00 Uhr am 01.02.12 schrieb Howard Chu: >> Sven Hartge wrote: >>> On 02/01/12 05:56, Howard Chu wrote: >>>> sven@svenhartge.de wrote: > >>> > > I get a very good backtrace, but since this backtrace contains >>> > > internal information I am a bit hesitant to attach this backtrace >>> > > to a public bug-report. >>> > >>> > The backtrace you sent shows the crash at a line of code which was >>> > already patched in RE24 due to ITS#7132. I believe this bug is already >>> > fixed. >>> >>> This is good news. Do you have any commit ID so I can try to backport >>> this fix to the version currently in Debian Squeeze? >> >> commit 42faa8393e6cd41a837b526777110b892541773a > > This simple patch applies flawless on 2.4.23 but still segfaults. Will > try on top of 2.4.28 tomorrow, backtraces will follow then, after I > verified my findings. > > > (Reason for trying this on top of 2.4.23 is because this is the version > in Debian Squeeze and I want to provide the DDs with a fix for Squeeze. > I fully understand that is not supported by OpenLDAP.) > Could you *please* try the RE24 checkout from GIT rather than 2.4.28? Thanks. That is substantially more useful than patching 2.4.28. You can check out an tarball of current RE24 with: git archive --format=tar --remote=git.openldap.org:~git/git/openldap.git OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_4 > openldap-2.4.29.tar Or via the web with: <http://www.openldap.org/devel/gitweb.cgi?p=openldap.git;a=snapshot;h=refs/heads/OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_4;sf=tgz> --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
changed state Feedback to Test moved from Incoming to Software Bugs
Sven Hartge wrote: > On 02.02.2012 11:25, Howard Chu wrote: >> Sven Hartge wrote: >>> Um 14:47 Uhr am 01.02.12 schrieb Quanah Gibson-Mount: >>> >>>> Could you *please* try the RE24 checkout from GIT rather than 2.4.28? >>>> Thanks. >>>> That is substantially more useful than patching 2.4.28. >>> >>> I'm sorry to report: still segfaults, backtrace is attached. >> >> This patch should take care of that crash. > > Yes, works. Thank you very much! Thanks for the confirmation, committed to master. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
changed notes changed state Test to Release
changed notes changed state Release to Closed
fixed in master fixed in RE24