Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 16:09:34 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The infamous dying daemons bug Message-ID: <19981108160934.30826@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811080909420.482-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu>; from John Fieber on Sun, Nov 08, 1998 at 09:22:50AM -0500 References: <19981108140935.06929@follo.net> <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811080909420.482-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Nov 08, 1998 at 09:22:50AM -0500, John Fieber wrote: > One question: Is the problem "sticky"? By that I mean, if it is > triggered by a memomry shortage, is something in the kernel > corrupted that tends to kill/corrupt daemons from that point in > time on, or is it just something that affects isolated processes. All daemons running at that point seems to get something corrupted. If you restart the daemon, it won't happen again until you again run out of memory (or whatever it is that trigger the corruption). > The symptom (junk pointer to low in ined's case) is obviously > triggered by some action of the process, but is the problem > itself triggered by an action of that same process? The 'junk pointer too low to make sense' seems to be a different problem, caused by race conditions in the signal handlers of inetd. There is a patch fixing this in a PR; however, David has said that this is not the 'right fix', so it has not been committed. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981108160934.30826>