[Bug nptl/4578] New: Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[Bug nptl/4578] New: Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com]

We hit an assertion in ld.so about every 6000 runs of the cluster manager
slurmstepd on SiCortex hardware.  This is evidently the same bug as

http://www.redhat.com/archives/phil-list/2003-December/msg00008.html

Evidently it has reappeared because of ld.so consistency checking and 
because our chip (6 way SMP at 500 MHz) has a wider window of vulnerability.

We've adapted the previously reported test case so that it fails about half the
time (attached) and developed a patch (attached) that resolves the problem.

The test case doesn't fail for us on opterons, the only other systems we have
available.

The failure message we get on our machines is:

Inconsistency detected by ld.so: dl-open.c: 215: dl_open_worker: Assertion
`_dl_debug_initialize (0, args->nsid)->r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

Details:

If a thread happens to hold dl_load_lock and have r_state set to RT_ADD or
RT_DELETE at the time another thread calls fork(), then the child exit code
from fork (in nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/fork.c in our case) re-initializes
dl_load_lock but does not restore r_state to RT_CONSISTENT. If the child
subsequently requires ld.so functionality before calling exec(), then the
assertion will fire.

The patch acquires dl_load_lock on entry to fork() and releases it on exit
from the parent path.  The child path is initialized as currently done.
This is essentially pthreads_atfork, but forced to be first because the
acquisition of dl_load_lock must happen before malloc_atfork is active
to avoid a deadlock.

-- 
           Summary: Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!
           Product: glibc
           Version: 2.3.5
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: nptl
        AssignedTo: drepper at redhat dot com
        ReportedBy: larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com
                CC: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com
  GCC host triplet: mips64-linux-gnu


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug nptl/4578] Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com]

------- Additional Comments From larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com  2007-05-31 19:00 -------
Created an attachment (id=1873)
 --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1873&action=view)
test case


-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug nptl/4578] Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com]

------- Additional Comments From larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com  2007-05-31 19:08 -------
Created an attachment (id=1874)
 --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1874&action=view)
proposed patch


-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug nptl/4578] Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[pasky at suse dot cz]

------- Additional Comments From pasky at suse dot cz  2007-06-08 17:49 -------
I think this is a dupe of bug 3429.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug nptl/4578] Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com]

------- Additional Comments From larry dot stewart at sicortex dot com  2007-06-08 18:13 -------
Actually it isn't a duplicate of 3429.  The assertion failure message is the same,
but it occurs on a different line of the source file, and we applied
the patch for 3429 without fixing our bug.  Sorry I didn't make a more
complete report.


-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug nptl/4578] Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[gautamshruti66 at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

--- Comment #6 from shruti <gautamshruti66 at gmail dot com> ---
Does this bug still exists? I came across this assertion, which I was running
my C program via an application running on heroku.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug nptl/4578] Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[gautamshruti66 at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

shruti <gautamshruti66 at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |gautamshruti66 at gmail dot com

--- Comment #5 from shruti <gautamshruti66 at gmail dot com> ---
Does this bug still exists?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug nptl/4578] Assertion `...r_state == RT_CONSISTENT' failed!

[schwab@linux-m68k.org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4578

Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|drepper.fsp at gmail dot    |unassigned at sourceware
                   |com                         |dot org

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.