From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 20 10:22:21 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FBDA16A4CE for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:22:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from carver.gumbysoft.com (carver.gumbysoft.com [66.220.23.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9859C43D1D for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:22:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dwhite@gumbysoft.com) Received: by carver.gumbysoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8B71572DC7; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:22:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by carver.gumbysoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8610072DBF; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:22:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:22:21 -0800 (PST) From: Doug White To: Daniel Eischen In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040220101615.U60703@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: openldap server + kse = bewm X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:22:21 -0000 On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Doug White wrote: > > > hey folks, > > > > Looks like the OpenLDAP server, slapd, and KSE don't get along too well. > > > > I can reliably segfault slapd by doing a few requests of it on a -CURRENT > > machine built this morning PST. TLS seems to accelerate things, but it > > What is TLS? In this case, Transport Layer Security, not Thread Local Storage. :) > > This is 100% reproducible, although initially it was croaking in > > pthread_testcancel() instead of a kse function. This leads me to suspect > > strange mutex corruption, but I'd like someone who understands kse to at > > least spot-check. I forgot to mention "croak" means "segfault". > Usually, this is from something that is using %gs and stomping > on our LDTs. Any warnings from the kernel about static LDT > allocations? NNo such message that I saw. I'm running X, but not the nvidia driver (the machine has a cirrus logic chip onboard). > > I thought at first it might be some strange interaction between berkeley > > db 4.2's special assembly mutexes and kse, but I rebuilt db42 with pthread > > mutexes and rebuilt openldap to use DB_PRIVATE so the db would mount, but > > no change in status. > > > > Here's the trace from gdb: > > This doesn't show much to me... As to the libc thing, I'm assuming its getting picked up as a dependency on something else. I'll check the build to make sure it isn't getting requested explicitly. Since the libc pthread_mutex_lock() immediately calls the libpthread one, I assumed it was some sort of stub function. -- Doug White | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve dwhite@gumbysoft.com | www.FreeBSD.org