* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
@ 2009-07-16 14:39 ` pasky at suse dot cz
2009-07-16 17:11 ` drepper at redhat dot com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pasky at suse dot cz @ 2009-07-16 14:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pasky at suse dot cz 2009-07-16 14:38 -------
Created an attachment (id=4056)
--> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4056&action=view)
proposed patch
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
2009-07-16 14:39 ` [Bug nscd/10402] " pasky at suse dot cz
@ 2009-07-16 17:11 ` drepper at redhat dot com
2009-07-17 14:51 ` drepper at redhat dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: drepper at redhat dot com @ 2009-07-16 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com 2009-07-16 17:11 -------
Applied to upstream.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
2009-07-16 14:39 ` [Bug nscd/10402] " pasky at suse dot cz
2009-07-16 17:11 ` drepper at redhat dot com
@ 2009-07-17 14:51 ` drepper at redhat dot com
2009-07-17 14:51 ` drepper at redhat dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: drepper at redhat dot com @ 2009-07-17 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |WAITING
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2009-07-17 14:51 ` drepper at redhat dot com
@ 2009-07-17 14:51 ` drepper at redhat dot com
2009-07-21 10:18 ` pasky at suse dot cz
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: drepper at redhat dot com @ 2009-07-17 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com 2009-07-17 14:51 -------
Actually, the patch is wrong. The unlocking deliberately doesn't happen at
those times. Keeping the lock is the key to handling memory allocations in a
thread-safe way.
I reverted the patch.
What is the problem you were trying to solve? Always provide that information.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2009-07-17 14:51 ` drepper at redhat dot com
@ 2009-07-21 10:18 ` pasky at suse dot cz
2009-07-21 10:46 ` jakub at redhat dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pasky at suse dot cz @ 2009-07-21 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pasky at suse dot cz 2009-07-21 10:17 -------
You are right, I forgot the locking scheme since I've reviewed your patch that
adds it; too bad there isn't a single comment in the code alerting the reader of
it. :(
I have already described the testcase in my first comment; is it not hanging for
you?
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |NEW
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2009-07-21 10:18 ` pasky at suse dot cz
@ 2009-07-21 10:46 ` jakub at redhat dot com
2009-08-25 14:37 ` pasky at suse dot cz
2009-08-25 22:46 ` pasky at suse dot cz
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: jakub at redhat dot com @ 2009-07-21 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat dot com 2009-07-21 10:46 -------
That reproducer is quite vague. You haven't provided your /etc/nsswitch.conf,
nor details about root and ttest user, etc.
Assuming only files for passwd and group databases and root
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
and non-existing ttest user, I can't reproduce this (at least not within 100000
cycles of that loop on a quad core box).
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2009-07-21 10:46 ` jakub at redhat dot com
@ 2009-08-25 14:37 ` pasky at suse dot cz
2009-08-25 22:46 ` pasky at suse dot cz
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pasky at suse dot cz @ 2009-08-25 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pasky at suse dot cz 2009-08-25 14:37 -------
I'm sorry, I wasn't indeed careful enough when testing - it turns out to be
specific to passwd: compat and +:::::: entry in /etc/passwd.
I'm debugging this further.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |NEW
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug nscd/10402] nscd locking severely broken
2009-07-16 14:38 [Bug nscd/10402] New: nscd locking severely broken pasky at suse dot cz
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2009-08-25 14:37 ` pasky at suse dot cz
@ 2009-08-25 22:46 ` pasky at suse dot cz
7 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: pasky at suse dot cz @ 2009-08-25 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pasky at suse dot cz 2009-08-25 22:46 -------
I'm sorry for the false bugreport, it turned out to be a trivial messup in a
local patch we have that introduces proper support for negtimeout == 0 - I
severely underestimated how much of a havoc can it cause. :-(
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WORKSFORME
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10402
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread