[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: (ITS#3698) [devel] test035-meta fails
>> if it isn't, a SIGSEGV or anythng bad might have occurred. In either
>> case, I think I need further info to be able to track what might have
>> happened. I've repeatedly run that test under heavy load on a fresh
>> build
>> from HEAD for hours this afternoon and I didn't see any problem. It's
>> of
>> paramount importance for me to have this and similar tests running
>> reliably, so I'd appreciate if you can send as much information as
>> possible.
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> [Switching to LWP 3]
> 0xfeb33218 in strlen () from /usr/lib/libc.so.1
> (gdb) bt
> #0 0xfeb33218 in strlen () from /usr/lib/libc.so.1
> #1 0xfeb86530 in _doprnt () from /usr/lib/libc.so.1
> #2 0xfeb88708 in vsnprintf () from /usr/lib/libc.so.1
> #3 0xff3171cc in lutil_debug (debug=-33561296, level=2147483647,
> fmt=0x121258 "[rw] %s: \"%s\" -> \"%s\"\n") at debug.c:82
>
> #3 0xff3171cc in lutil_debug (debug=-33561296, level=2147483647,
> fmt=0x121258 "[rw] %s: \"%s\" -> \"%s\"\n") at debug.c:82
> (gdb) l
> 82 va_start( vl, fmt );
> 83 vsnprintf( buffer, sizeof(buffer), fmt, vl );
> 84 buffer[sizeof(buffer)-1] = '\0';
> 85 if( log_file != NULL ) {
> 86 fputs( buffer, log_file );
> 87 fflush( log_file );
> 88 }
> 89 fputs( buffer, stderr );
> 90 va_end( vl );
> 91 }
That's way more interesting. Looks like when debugging librewrite stuff
I'm printing a NULL, which on Linux doesn't harm but might on Solaris.
I'll recheck all that portion of code; yoru stack trace doesn't indicate
where the accident occurred in back-meta. Can you step a bit more
backwards? Moreover, you should be able to complete the test if you
reduce the logs (e.g. with SLAPD_DEBUG=0).
Thanks, Ando.
--
Pierangelo Masarati
mailto:pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it
SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497