From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7F2CC433E0 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:31:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E09207E8 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:31:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=tu-berlin.de header.i=@tu-berlin.de header.b="kjYi4KTj" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726679AbgFZMb5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 08:31:57 -0400 Received: from exchange.tu-berlin.de ([130.149.7.70]:3173 "EHLO exchange.tu-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726527AbgFZMb4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 08:31:56 -0400 Received: from SPMA-03.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Email Security Appliance) with SMTP id 9139D6DBFB_EF5EABAB; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:31:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from exchange.tu-berlin.de (exchange.tu-berlin.de [130.149.7.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "exchange.tu-berlin.de", Issuer "DFN-Verein Global Issuing CA" (not verified)) by SPMA-03.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de (Sophos Email Appliance) with ESMTPS id 2E6D96D087_EF5EABAF; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:31:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ex-01.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de (130.149.7.70) by EX-CAS-01.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de (130.149.6.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 14:31:53 +0200 Received: from ex-02.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de (172.26.35.185) by ex-01.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de (172.26.35.184) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.529.5; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 14:31:53 +0200 Received: from ex-02.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de ([172.26.26.142]) by ex-02.tubit.win.tu-berlin.de ([172.26.26.142]) with mapi id 15.02.0529.008; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 14:31:53 +0200 From: "Kraus, Sebastian" To: "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" CC: Doug Nazar , "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: Strange segmentation violations of rpc.gssd in Debian Buster Thread-Topic: Strange segmentation violations of rpc.gssd in Debian Buster Thread-Index: AQHWSxgxwlq3b/mulkebnqBRRSeMOajpu9IAgAEVEpE= Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:31:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20200619220434.GB1594@fieldses.org> <28a44712b25c4420909360bd813f8bfd@tu-berlin.de> <20200620170316.GH1514@fieldses.org> <5c45562c90404838944ee71a1d926c74@tu-berlin.de> <20200622223628.GC11051@fieldses.org> <406fe972135846dc8a23b60be59b0590@tu-berlin.de>,<1527b158-3404-168c-8908-de4b8a709ccd@nazar.ca> In-Reply-To: <1527b158-3404-168c-8908-de4b8a709ccd@nazar.ca> Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.149.19.173] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-PMWin-Version: 4.0.1, Antivirus-Engine: 3.77.1, Antivirus-Data: 5.76 X-PureMessage: [Scanned] X-SASI-RCODE: 200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tu-berlin.de; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; s=dkim-tub; bh=WfhIWKPOt2tOfv17F+0LcVjyYXCKlZmaAdNnH4qxzkE=; b=kjYi4KTjzg+NsM8WfBdic46YMW3cjrlNJx3qDtdfZyxSnL5FZnIcpVyCSDw8tV1t9bNiaYW3D0TMHag547ZYAIMQwRFsr9rNSF+qIRQauJA93hnlxlF9BFshR/2zqfVg/wQJZyEa3u2uvXplAp+qHiaQHbhkz6kbKT6/AShp5U0= Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Hi Doug, Dear Bruce, FYI, I filed a bug with nfs-common package in Debian Buster: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D963746 Hope this helps to track down the problem further and shed some light on th= e mysterious segfaults of rpc.gssd.=20 >> A quick google links to https://wiki.debian.org/HowToGetABacktrace. BTW: Thanks very much for the link. This helped to find the right dbgsym pa= ckages in order to produce a more readable and hopefully valuable backtrace= . ;-) I also passed by a similar and still open issue in the CentOS bug tracker: https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=3D15895 Best and Thanks for your support up to now Sebastian ___________________ Sebastian Kraus Team IT am Institut f=FCr Chemie Geb=E4ude C, Stra=DFe des 17. Juni 115, Raum C7 Technische Universit=E4t Berlin Fakult=E4t II Institut f=FCr Chemie Sekretariat C3 Stra=DFe des 17. Juni 135 10623 Berlin Email: sebastian.kraus@tu-berlin.de ________________________________________ From: Doug Nazar Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 23:44 To: Kraus, Sebastian; J. Bruce Fields Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Strange segmentation violations of rpc.gssd in Debian Buster On 2020-06-25 13:43, Kraus, Sebastian wrote: > [Current thread is 1 (Thread 0x7fb2eaeba700 (LWP 14174))] > (gdb) bt > #0 0x000056233fff038e in ?? () > #1 0x000056233fff09f8 in ?? () > #2 0x000056233fff0b92 in ?? () > #3 0x000056233fff13b3 in ?? () > #4 0x00007fb2eb8dbfa3 in start_thread (arg=3D) at pthread= _create.c:486 > #5 0x00007fb2eb80c4cf in clone () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/c= lone.S:95 > (gdb) quit > > > I am not an expert in analyzing stack and backtraces. Is there anything m= eaningful, you are able to extract from the trace? > As far as I see, thread 14174 caused the segmentation violation just afte= r its birth on clone. > Please correct me, if I am in error. > Seems Debian Buster does not ship any dedicated package with debug symbol= s for the rpc.gssd executable. > So far, I was not able to find such a package. > What's your opinon about the trace? You'll need to install the debug symbols for your distribution/package. A quick google links to https://wiki.debian.org/HowToGetABacktrace. Those ?? lines should then be replaced with function, file & line numbers. I've been following this with interest since it used to happen to me a lot. It hasn't recently, even though every so often I spend a few hours trying to re-create it to try debug it. Doug=