[Users] Stability, and -DF_MALLOC

[Bogdan-Andrei Iancu]

Hi Kanakatti,

seams to be in usrloc module - maybe not so many people are using 
write-trough usrloc mode ;). It will be really helpful if you could 
provide my with the core + binaries + sources.

regards,
bogdan

Kanakatti Mahesh Subramanya wrote:

> Briefly (oh so briefly) put the version with -DF_MALLOC online, and, 
> as expected, had a couple of crashes.
> There was really not much information in the debug logs.
> The core dumps said the following
>
> Dump 1
> #0  0xb7f083f0 in strnlen () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #1  0xb7eda8e2 in vfprintf () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #2  0xb7f67fa1 in vsyslog () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #3  0xb7f67e0f in syslog () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #4  0xb7d5da49 in wt_timer (_r=0xafe4edd0) at urecord.c:267
> #5  0xb7d57548 in timer_udomain (_d=0xafe407e8) at udomain.c:424
> #6  0xb7d52f52 in synchronize_all_udomains () at dlist.c:325
> #7  0xb7d5ac39 in destroy () at ul_mod.c:245
> #8  0x0807286e in destroy_modules () at sr_module.c:355
> #9  0x0805a6dd in cleanup (show_status=1) at main.c:351
> #10 0x0805b125 in handle_sigs () at main.c:510
> #11 0x0805ba6a in main_loop () at main.c:1163
> #12 0x0805c916 in main (argc=8, argv=0x0) at main.c:1564
>
> Dump 2
>
> #0  0xb7d5d8d8 in wt_timer (_r=0xb03c3168) at urecord.c:247
> 247                     if (!VALID_CONTACT(ptr, act_time)) {
> (gdb) bt
> #0  0xb7d5d8d8 in wt_timer (_r=0xb03c3168) at urecord.c:247
> #1  0xb7d57548 in timer_udomain (_d=0xafe63518) at udomain.c:424
> #2  0xb7d52f52 in synchronize_all_udomains () at dlist.c:325
> #3  0xb7d5ac39 in destroy () at ul_mod.c:245
> #4  0x0807286e in destroy_modules () at sr_module.c:355
> #5  0x0805a6dd in cleanup (show_status=1) at main.c:351
> #6  0x0805b125 in handle_sigs () at main.c:510
> #7  0x0805ba6a in main_loop () at main.c:1163
> #8  0x0805c916 in main (argc=8, argv=0x0) at main.c:1564
> (gdb) print ptr
> $1 = (ucontact_t *) 0xc
> (gdb) print act_time
> $2 = 1123163783
>
> Anything obvious leaps out at you???
>
>
> Cheers, and thanx...
>
> Kanakatti Mahesh Subramanya wrote:
>
>> Yeah, recompiled, etc., etc.
>> I was actually hoping for somebody to say "Oh Yeah, if you are using 
>> tm, be sure to .... if you have -DF_MALLOC"
>> Unfortunately, the problem only occurs at *high* loads, and I cant 
>> replicate this on a test system.
>> Soooo, for now, I'm probably just going to leave -DBG_QM_MALLOC in 
>> place, and hope that the "a miracle occurs" approach to solving 
>> problems pans out :-)
>>
>>
>> Thanx anyway....
>