From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 3 08:41:36 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0634106564A for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 08:41:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from frank@zzattack.org) Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com (mail-ey0-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 762638FC15 for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 08:41:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eyd10 with SMTP id 10so1246708eyd.13 for ; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 01:41:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.35.93 with SMTP id t69mr714580eea.206.1320309695043; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 01:41:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.31.45.20] (163-68-ftth.onsneteindhoven.nl. [88.159.68.163]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 54sm13655894eex.8.2011.11.03.01.41.33 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 03 Nov 2011 01:41:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4EB2538D.3090108@zzattack.org> Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:40:45 +0100 From: Frank Razenberg User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Chadwick , FreeBSD Stable Mailing List References: <4EB1BCAD.7080206@zzattack.org> <20111102233807.GA67112@icarus.home.lan> <4EB1D6F9.3060008@zzattack.org> <20111103000124.GA67550@icarus.home.lan> <4EB1DD51.4080808@zzattack.org> <20111103002352.GA67904@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <20111103002352.GA67904@icarus.home.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: smartctl / mpt on 9.0-RC1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:41:37 -0000 > Was this system "upgraded" from RELENG_8 to RELENG_9, or was a fresh > install of 9.x put on it directly? The system was freshly installed. Prior to my buildworld and buildkernel, smartctl didn't work either. > Is there someone else on the list who uses mps(4) on 9.x and has success > using smartmontools? Actually the mpt driver is used, not the mps driver. Don't know if that should make a difference. It seems my last email did not end up on the list so I'm unsure whether it was blocked or what happened. To summarise: I get a small bit more info at the bottom of the stack after building the port with WITH_DEBUG=1. -Frank #1086 0x0000000800fe4338 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () from /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 #1087 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () #1088 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () #1089 0x00007fffffffda00 in ?? () #1090 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () #1091 0x0000000801ca4b68 in ?? () #1092 0x0000000801ca4b98 in ?? () #1093 0x0000000801ca5578 in ?? () ---Type to continue, or q to quit--- #1094 0x0000000800fe4338 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () from /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 #1095 0x0000000801c831b0 in ?? () #1096 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () #1097 0x0001000101010101 in ?? () #1098 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () #1099 0x00007fffff000000 in ?? () #1100 0x00007fffffffdb40 in ?? () #1101 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () #1102 0x00000008014f7fd2 in __cxa_atexit () from /lib/libc.so.7 #1103 0x000000000040705c in main (argc=Cannot access memory at address 0xffffffffffffffd4 ) at smartctl.cpp:1129 On 11/3/2011 1:23 AM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 01:16:17AM +0100, Frank Razenberg wrote: >> Sorry, yes, there's actually a lot more, but there's a pattern >> repeating over 4 lines. >> At #1086 it stops. > Okay. > >> I also tried with the binary package but it seems to be missing on >> the ftp server: >> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-9-current/sysutils/smartmontools-5.42.tbz >> gives a 'not found'. >> The version from 8-stable can't be used either (Shared object >> "libcam.so.5" not found, required by "smartctl"). > You won't be able to use a package from RELENG_8 that relies on CAM, > because CAM has been changed significantly between 8 and 9 -- enough > that a library version bump was required. This is why on your system > "libcam.so.5" can't be found; I'm sure you have libcam.so.6. Please do > not link the two together either. > >> The compiler was indeed gcc. > Okay. As long as you built off of source then the software should > be in sync with underlying library API changes and so on. > >> ................................. >> #36 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #37 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #38 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #39 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #40 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #41 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #42 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #43 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #44 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #45 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #46 0x00000000006629d8 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () >> #47 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #48 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #49 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #50 0x00000000006629d8 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () >> #51 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #52 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #53 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #54 0x00000000006629d8 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () >> #55 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #56 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> .............................. >> #1062 0x00000000006629d8 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () >> #1063 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1064 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1065 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1066 0x00000000006629d8 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () >> #1067 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1068 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1069 0x00007fffffffdac0 in ?? () >> #1070 0x00007fffff000000 in ?? () >> ---Type to continue, or q to quit--- >> #1071 0x0000000801ca4b68 in ?? () >> #1072 0x0000000801ca4b98 in ?? () >> #1073 0x0000000801ca5578 in ?? () >> #1074 0x00000000006629d8 in std::string::_Rep::_S_empty_rep_storage () >> #1075 0x0001000101010101 in ?? () >> #1076 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1077 0x0000000801000000 in ceil () from /lib/libm.so.5 >> #1078 0x00007fffffffdb00 in ?? () >> #1079 0x0000000000000003 in ?? () >> #1080 0x00007fffffffdb00 in ?? () >> #1081 0x00007fffffffdb40 in ?? () >> #1082 0x00007fffffffdb20 in ?? () >> #1083 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1084 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () >> #1085 0x0000000000407186 in ?? () >> #1086 0x000000000040317c in ?? () >> Previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?) >> (gdb) > This stack trace is significantly corrupted. I'm not sure what to say > about this, or how to get a reliable core/crash. > > Was this system "upgraded" from RELENG_8 to RELENG_9, or was a fresh > install of 9.x put on it directly? > > Is there someone else on the list who uses mps(4) on 9.x and has success > using smartmontools? What I'm trying to figure out is if this problem > is isolated or not. >