10:31 a.m.
We saw a crash in version 2.8.2 running an iozone crash:
Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
#0 0x00007ff028dce240 in atomic_sub_uint32_t (var=0x104, sub=1) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/include/abstract_atomic.h:384
384 return __atomic_sub_fetch(var, sub, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install bzip2-libs-1.0.6-12.el7.x86_64
dbus-libs-1.11.16-1.fc26.x86_64 elfutils-libelf-0.158-3.el7.x86_64
elfutils-libs-0.158-3.el7.x86_64 glibc-2.17-55.el7.x86_64 gssproxy-0.3.0-9.el7.x86_64
keyutils-libs-1.5.8-3.el7.x86_64 krb5-libs-1.15.1-8.el7.x86_64 libacl-2.2.51-12.el7.x86_64
libattr-2.4.46-12.el7.x86_64 libblkid-2.23.2-16.el7.x86_64 libcap-2.22-8.el7.x86_64
libcom_err-1.42.9-10.el7.x86_64 libgcrypt-1.5.3-4.el7.x86_64
libgpg-error-1.12-3.el7.x86_64 libnfsidmap-0.25-9.el7.x86_64 libselinux-2.5-11.el7.x86_64
libuuid-2.23.2-16.el7.x86_64 libwbclient-4.8.3-4.el7.x86_64 pcre-8.32-12.el7.x86_64
samba-client-libs-4.8.3-4.el7.x86_64 samba-winbind-modules-4.8.3-4.el7.x86_64
sssd-client-1.11.2-65.el7.x86_64 systemd-libs-219-42.el7_4.1.x86_64
userspace-rcu-0.7.16-1.el7.x86_64 xz-libs-5.1.2-8alpha.el7.x86_64
zlib-1.2.7-13.el7.x86_64
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00007ff028dce240 in atomic_sub_uint32_t (var=0x104, sub=1) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/include/abstract_atomic.h:384
#1 0x00007ff028dce265 in atomic_dec_uint32_t (var=0x104) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/include/abstract_atomic.h:405
#2 0x00007ff028dd1b65 in dupreq_entry_put (dv=0x0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/RPCAL/nfs_dupreq.c:912
#3 0x00007ff028dd4630 in nfs_dupreq_rele (req=0x7fec44a269f0, func=0x7ff029159d60
<nfs3_func_desc+672>) at /usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/RPCAL/nfs_dupreq.c:1382
#4 0x00007ff028d74bc5 in free_args (reqdata=0x7fec44a269f0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/MainNFSD/nfs_worker_thread.c:693
#5 0x00007ff028d77783 in nfs_rpc_process_request (reqdata=0x7fec44a269f0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/MainNFSD/nfs_worker_thread.c:1509
#6 0x00007ff028d77a74 in nfs_rpc_valid_NFS (req=0x7fec44a269f0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/MainNFSD/nfs_worker_thread.c:1601
#7 0x00007ff028b2632d in svc_vc_decode (req=0x7fec44a269f0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/libntirpc/src/svc_vc.c:829
#8 0x00007ff028b227bf in svc_request (xprt=0x7fee0c202ad0, xdrs=0x7fec3c987a70) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/libntirpc/src/svc_rqst.c:793
#9 0x00007ff028b2623e in svc_vc_recv (xprt=0x7fee0c202ad0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/libntirpc/src/svc_vc.c:802
#10 0x00007ff028b22740 in svc_rqst_xprt_task (wpe=0x7fee0c202cf0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/libntirpc/src/svc_rqst.c:774
#11 0x00007ff028b23048 in svc_rqst_epoll_loop (wpe=0x108d570) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/libntirpc/src/svc_rqst.c:1089
#12 0x00007ff028b2baff in work_pool_thread (arg=0x7fed44052070) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/libntirpc/src/work_pool.c:184
#13 0x00007ff0270c8df3 in start_thread () from /lib64/libpthread.so.0
#14 0x00007ff0267cd3dd in clone () from /lib64/libc.so.6
(gdb) frame 5
#5 0x00007ff028d77783 in nfs_rpc_process_request (reqdata=0x7fec44a269f0) at
/usr/src/debug/nfs-ganesha-2.8.2/MainNFSD/nfs_worker_thread.c:1509
1509 free_args(reqdata);
(gdb) p *reqdata
$2 = {
svc = {
rq_xprt = 0x7fee0c202ad0,
rq_clntname = 0x0,
rq_svcname = 0x0,
rq_xdrs = 0x7fec3c987a70,
rq_u1 = 0x0,
rq_u2 = 0x0,
rq_cksum = 14781944753697519387,
rq_auth = 0x7ff028d45cd0 <svc_auth_none>,
rq_ap1 = 0x0,
rq_ap2 = 0x0,
...
Notice rq_u1 == 0. nfs_rpc_process_request is calling free_args which is calling
nfs_dupreq_rele. There is a comment at the beginning of nfs_dupreq_rele:
* We assert req->rq_u1 now points to the corresponding duplicate request
* cache entry (dv).
But this assumption doesn't seem to be true, and eventually this will be dereferenced
leading to a crash. We're trying to reproduce the problem with NIV_FULL_DEBUG.
Has anyone seen this problem before, or know what would cause rq_u1 to be 0? Should there
be a check for NULL in nfs_dupreq_rele in addition to DUPREQ_NOCACHE?
Bill
10:11 a.m.
I think the bug is caused by the following:
In nfs_dupreq_start, when the state is DUPREQ_START, the following code is entered:
if (unlikely(dv->state == DUPREQ_START)) {
status = DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED;
Note that in this case req->rq_u1 is not assigned.
Later, the caller of this routine, nfs_rpc_process_request, will check the status, and in
the case of DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED will break out of the switch statement and jump to
freeargs, which will call free_args and then nfs_dupreq_rele. Unfortunately,
nfs_dupreq_rele is assuming that req->rq_u1 points to a cache entry, but it was never
assigned in this case, leading to dereferencing a null ptr. In 2.6, there was a check to
see if res_nfs was assigned before calling nfs_dupreq_rele, but it appears that it was
removed in 2.8 and later. The code should either check for req->rq_u1 or res_nfs.
Although we noticed this bug in 2.8.2, from looking at the code it looks like it is also
in the tip.
Bill
11:40 a.m.
Hi Bill,
Do you know if there is a patch that fixes this core dump? I'm hitting the
same with 2.8.3.
Thanks,
Pradeep
On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM <katcherw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think the bug is caused by the following:
In nfs_dupreq_start, when the state is DUPREQ_START, the following code is
entered:
if (unlikely(dv->state == DUPREQ_START)) {
status = DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED;
Note that in this case req->rq_u1 is not assigned.
Later, the caller of this routine, nfs_rpc_process_request, will check the
status, and in the case of DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED will break out of the
switch statement and jump to freeargs, which will call free_args and then
nfs_dupreq_rele. Unfortunately, nfs_dupreq_rele is assuming that req->rq_u1
points to a cache entry, but it was never assigned in this case, leading to
dereferencing a null ptr. In 2.6, there was a check to see if res_nfs was
assigned before calling nfs_dupreq_rele, but it appears that it was removed
in 2.8 and later. The code should either check for req->rq_u1 or res_nfs.
Although we noticed this bug in 2.8.2, from looking at the code it looks
like it is also in the tip.
Bill
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
7:49 a.m.
Pradeep,
I believe the fix went into 3.2.
Bill
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:41 PM Pradeep <pradeepthomas(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Bill,
Do you know if there is a patch that fixes this core dump? I'm hitting the
same with 2.8.3.
Thanks,
Pradeep
On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM <katcherw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the bug is caused by the following:
>
> In nfs_dupreq_start, when the state is DUPREQ_START, the following code
> is entered:
>
> if (unlikely(dv->state == DUPREQ_START)) {
> status = DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED;
>
> Note that in this case req->rq_u1 is not assigned.
>
> Later, the caller of this routine, nfs_rpc_process_request, will check
> the status, and in the case of DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED will break out of the
> switch statement and jump to freeargs, which will call free_args and then
> nfs_dupreq_rele. Unfortunately, nfs_dupreq_rele is assuming that req->rq_u1
> points to a cache entry, but it was never assigned in this case, leading to
> dereferencing a null ptr. In 2.6, there was a check to see if res_nfs was
> assigned before calling nfs_dupreq_rele, but it appears that it was removed
> in 2.8 and later. The code should either check for req->rq_u1 or res_nfs.
>
> Although we noticed this bug in 2.8.2, from looking at the code it looks
> like it is also in the tip.
>
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
>
1:31 p.m.
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:49:13AM -0500, William Katcher wrote:
Pradeep,
I believe the fix went into 3.2.
Is there a plan to do v2.8.4? Would be nice to have this patch in 2.8.x aswell,
as it fixes a crash / coredump.
-- Pasi
> Bill
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:41 PM Pradeep <[1]pradeepthomas(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
> Do you know if there is a patch that fixes this core dump? I'm hitting
> the same with 2.8.3.
> Thanks,
> Pradeep
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM <[2]katcherw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think the bug is caused by the following:
>
> In nfs_dupreq_start, when the state is DUPREQ_START, the following
> code is entered:
>
> Â Â Â Â Â Â if (unlikely(dv->state == DUPREQ_START)) {
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â status = DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED;
>
> Note that in this case req->rq_u1 is not assigned.
>
> Later, the caller of this routine, nfs_rpc_process_request, will check
> the status, and in the case of DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED will break out
> of the switch statement and jump to freeargs, which will call
> free_args and then nfs_dupreq_rele. Unfortunately, nfs_dupreq_rele is
> assuming that req->rq_u1 points to a cache entry, but it was never
> assigned in this case, leading to dereferencing a null ptr. In 2.6,
> there was a check to see if res_nfs was assigned before calling
> nfs_dupreq_rele, but it appears that it was removed in 2.8 and later.
> The code should either check for req->rq_u1 or res_nfs.
>
> Although we noticed this bug in 2.8.2, from looking at the code it
> looks like it is also in the tip.
>
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list -- [3]devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to [4]devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
5:57 a.m.
On 1/20/20 4:31 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:49:13AM -0500, William Katcher wrote:
> Pradeep,
> I believe the fix went into 3.2.
>
Is there a plan to do v2.8.4? Would be nice to have this patch in 2.8.x aswell,
as it fixes a crash / coredump.
Yes
Daniel
-- Pasi
> Bill
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:41 PM Pradeep <[1]pradeepthomas(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
> Do you know if there is a patch that fixes this core dump? I'm hitting
> the same with 2.8.3.
> Thanks,
> Pradeep
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM <[2]katcherw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think the bug is caused by the following:
>
> In nfs_dupreq_start, when the state is DUPREQ_START, the following
> code is entered:
>
> Â Â Â Â Â Â if (unlikely(dv->state == DUPREQ_START)) {
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â status = DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED;
>
> Note that in this case req->rq_u1 is not assigned.
>
> Later, the caller of this routine, nfs_rpc_process_request, will check
> the status, and in the case of DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED will break out
> of the switch statement and jump to freeargs, which will call
> free_args and then nfs_dupreq_rele. Unfortunately, nfs_dupreq_rele is
> assuming that req->rq_u1 points to a cache entry, but it was never
> assigned in this case, leading to dereferencing a null ptr. In 2.6,
> there was a check to see if res_nfs was assigned before calling
> nfs_dupreq_rele, but it appears that it was removed in 2.8 and later.
> The code should either check for req->rq_u1 or res_nfs.
>
> Although we noticed this bug in 2.8.2, from looking at the code it
> looks like it is also in the tip.
>
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list -- [3]devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to [4]devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
4:21 a.m.
New subject: Crash in dupreq / v2.8.4
Hello,
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 08:57:21AM -0500, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote:
On 1/20/20 4:31 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:49:13AM -0500, William Katcher wrote:
>> Pradeep,
>> I believe the fix went into 3.2.
>>
>Is there a plan to do v2.8.4? Would be nice to have this patch in 2.8.x aswell,
>as it fixes a crash / coredump.
Yes
Any thoughts about v2.8.4 release timeframe?
Thanks,
-- Pasi
>
> Daniel
>
> >
> >
> >-- Pasi
> >
> >> Bill
> >> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:41 PM Pradeep
<[1]pradeepthomas(a)gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Bill,
> >> Do you know if there is a patch that fixes this core dump? I'm
hitting
> >> the same with 2.8.3.
> >> Thanks,
> >> Pradeep
> >> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM <[2]katcherw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think the bug is caused by the following:
> >>
> >> In nfs_dupreq_start, when the state is DUPREQ_START, the following
> >> code is entered:
> >>
> >> Â Â Â Â Â Â if (unlikely(dv->state == DUPREQ_START)) {
> >> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â status = DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED;
> >>
> >> Note that in this case req->rq_u1 is not assigned.
> >>
> >> Later, the caller of this routine, nfs_rpc_process_request, will
check
> >> the status, and in the case of DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED will break out
> >> of the switch statement and jump to freeargs, which will call
> >> free_args and then nfs_dupreq_rele. Unfortunately, nfs_dupreq_rele
is
> >> assuming that req->rq_u1 points to a cache entry, but it was
never
> >> assigned in this case, leading to dereferencing a null ptr. In 2.6,
> >> there was a check to see if res_nfs was assigned before calling
> >> nfs_dupreq_rele, but it appears that it was removed in 2.8 and
later.
> >> The code should either check for req->rq_u1 or res_nfs.
> >>
> >> Although we noticed this bug in 2.8.2, from looking at the code it
> >> looks like it is also in the tip.
> >>
> >> Bill
6:26 a.m.
New subject: Crash in dupreq / v2.8.4
On 4/3/20 7:21 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 08:57:21AM -0500, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote:
>
> On 1/20/20 4:31 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:49:13AM -0500, William Katcher wrote:
>>> Pradeep,
>>> I believe the fix went into 3.2.
>>>
>> Is there a plan to do v2.8.4? Would be nice to have this patch in 2.8.x aswell,
>> as it fixes a crash / coredump.
>
> Yes
>
Any thoughts about v2.8.4 release timeframe?
As soon as Frank makes the backport doc, I'll start on 3.x and 2.8.x
releases. It should be about a week after that.
Daniel
Thanks,
-- Pasi
>
> Daniel
>
>>
>>
>> -- Pasi
>>
>>> Bill
>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:41 PM Pradeep
<[1]pradeepthomas(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Bill,
>>> Do you know if there is a patch that fixes this core dump? I'm
hitting
>>> the same with 2.8.3.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pradeep
>>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM <[2]katcherw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the bug is caused by the following:
>>>
>>> In nfs_dupreq_start, when the state is DUPREQ_START, the following
>>> code is entered:
>>>
>>> Â Â Â Â Â Â if (unlikely(dv->state == DUPREQ_START)) {
>>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â status = DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED;
>>>
>>> Note that in this case req->rq_u1 is not assigned.
>>>
>>> Later, the caller of this routine, nfs_rpc_process_request, will
check
>>> the status, and in the case of DUPREQ_BEING_PROCESSED will break out
>>> of the switch statement and jump to freeargs, which will call
>>> free_args and then nfs_dupreq_rele. Unfortunately, nfs_dupreq_rele
is
>>> assuming that req->rq_u1 points to a cache entry, but it was
never
>>> assigned in this case, leading to dereferencing a null ptr. In 2.6,
>>> there was a check to see if res_nfs was assigned before calling
>>> nfs_dupreq_rele, but it appears that it was removed in 2.8 and
later.
>>> The code should either check for req->rq_u1 or res_nfs.
>>>
>>> Although we noticed this bug in 2.8.2, from looking at the code it
>>> looks like it is also in the tip.
>>>
>>> Bill
1484
days inactive
1617
days old
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Daniel Gryniewicz -
Daniel Gryniewicz -
katcherw＠gmail.com -
Pasi Kärkkäinen -
Pradeep -
William Katcher