[SR-Users] kamailio 4.2 ，have some problems when use mysql db
张顺通
shuntongzhang at gmail.com
Mon Oct 20 12:16:35 CEST 2014
4.2.0 have a core
#0 0x00007ffff7488265 in raise () from /lib64/libc.so.6
No symbol table info available.
#1 0x00007ffff7489d10 in abort () from /lib64/libc.so.6
No symbol table info available.
#2 0x0000000000615b74 in qm_debug_frag (qm=0x7ffff6c55010,
f=0x7ffff6cdcf08) at mem/q_malloc.c:161
__FUNCTION__ = "qm_debug_frag"
#3 0x0000000000616d87 in qm_malloc (qm=0x7ffff6c55010, size=56,
file=0x7ffff5fedef8 "<core>: db_res.c", func=0x7ffff5fee288
"db_new_result", line=112)
at mem/q_malloc.c:388
f = 0x7ffff6cdcf08
hash = 2057
list_cntr = 1
__FUNCTION__ = "qm_malloc"
#4 0x00007ffff5fdaa2f in db_new_result () at db_res.c:112
r = 0x0
__FUNCTION__ = "db_new_result"
#5 0x00007ffff6a386d6 in db_mysql_new_result () at km_res.c:235
obj = 0x0
__FUNCTION__ = "db_mysql_new_result"
#6 0x00007ffff6a29c7a in db_mysql_store_result (_h=0x7ffff6cb4e78,
_r=0x7fffffffdf38) at km_dbase.c:227
code = -165731152
__FUNCTION__ = "db_mysql_store_result"
#7 0x00007ffff5fd3516 in db_do_query_internal (_h=0x7ffff6cb4e78,
_k=0x7fffffffdf70, _op=0x0, _v=0x7fffffffdf40, _c=0x7fffffffdf60, _n=1,
_nc=1, _o=0x0,
_r=0x7fffffffdf38, val2str=0x7ffff6a39374 <db_mysql_val2str>,
submit_query=0x7ffff6a2825c <db_mysql_submit_query>,
store_result=0x7ffff6a2998c <db_mysql_store_result>, _l=0) at
db_query.c:137
tmp = 32767
off = 63
ret = 23
__FUNCTION__ = "db_do_query_internal"
#8 0x00007ffff5fd3fbd in db_do_query (_h=0x7ffff6cb4e78,
_k=0x7fffffffdf70, _op=0x0, _v=0x7fffffffdf40, _c=0x7fffffffdf60, _n=1,
_nc=1, _o=0x0, _r=0x7fffffffdf38,
val2str=0x7ffff6a39374 <db_mysql_val2str>, submit_query=0x7ffff6a2825c
<db_mysql_submit_query>, store_result=0x7ffff6a2998c
<db_mysql_store_result>)
at db_query.c:156
No locals.
#9 0x00007ffff6a2b04e in db_mysql_query (_h=0x7ffff6cb4e78,
_k=0x7fffffffdf70, _op=0x0, _v=0x7fffffffdf40, _c=0x7fffffffdf60, _n=1,
_nc=1, _o=0x0, _r=0x7fffffffdf38)
at km_dbase.c:323
No locals.
#10 0x00007ffff5fcd6e9 in db_table_version (dbf=0x7ffff2d1e3c0,
connection=0x7ffff6cb4e78, table=0x7ffff2d1d990) at db.c:400
key = {0x7fffffffdf20}
col = {0x7fffffffdf10}
val = {{type = DB1_STR, nul = 0, free = -167987365, val = {int_val
= -223246127, ll_val = 140737265109201, double_val =
6.9533447780108125e-310,
time_val = 140737265109201, string_val = 0x7ffff2b188d1
"dispatcher", str_val = {s = 0x7ffff2b188d1 "dispatcher", len = 10},
blob_val = {s = 0x7ffff2b188d1 "dispatcher", len = 10}, bitmap_val =
4071721169}}}
res = 0x0
ver = 0x0
version = 0x9c7be0
tmp1 = {s = 0x7ffff5feb0e1 "table_name", len = 10}
tmp2 = {s = 0x7ffff5feb0ec "table_version", len = 13}
ret = 8
__FUNCTION__ = "db_table_version"
#11 0x00007ffff2aeab2f in init_ds_db () at dispatch.c:666
ret = 297
__FUNCTION__ = "init_ds_db"
#12 0x00007ffff2b04434 in mod_init () at dispatcher.c:317
avp_spec = {type = 48, getf = 0x7fffffffe190, setf =
0x7fffffffe0d0, pvp = {pvn = {type = 16, nfree = 0x3000000028, u = {isname
= {type = -7760, name = {
n = 7292328, s = {s = 0x6f45a8 "DEBUG", len = 7555677},
re = 0x6f45a8}}, dname = 0x3ffffe1b0}}, pvi = {type = 7555621, u = {ival =
-223246127,
dval = 0x7ffff2b188d1}}}, trans = 0x0}
__FUNCTION__ = "mod_init"
#13 0x000000000058f59d in init_mod (m=0x7ffff6cb3740) at sr_module.c:966
__FUNCTION__ = "init_mod"
#14 0x000000000058f8a2 in init_modules () at sr_module.c:995
t = 0x7ffff77ac500
i = 1187628493
__FUNCTION__ = "init_modules"
#15 0x00000000004aa2b0 in main (argc=5, argv=0x7fffffffe528) at main.c:2501
cfg_stream = 0xa94020
c = -1
r = 32767
tmp = 0x7ffff7ffd000 ""
tmp_len = 32767
port = -7008
proto = 32767
options = 0x7023e0
":f:cm:M:dVIhEeb:l:L:n:vKrRDTN:W:w:t:u:g:P:G:SQ:O:a:A:"
ret = -1
seed = 39348307
rfd = 8
debug_save = 0
debug_flag = 0
dont_fork_cnt = 0
n_lst = 0xf0b2ff
p = 0xbf <Address 0xbf out of bounds>
__FUNCTION__ = "main"
2014-10-20 18:11 GMT+08:00 Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>:
> What are the differences between the server that works and the one that
> doesn't? I mean hardware and operating system details?
>
> Checking quickly the source code and comparing with logs, it doesn't
> reveal any problem -- it is about allocation of the next fragment, which
> was not used at all before, after the one allocated previously. The only
> reason I can think of it right now is corrupted memory or faulty OS.
>
> Daniel
>
>
> On 20/10/14 11:56, 张顺通 wrote:
>
> 4.2 have the same problem.
> at begin i use 4.1, i think this is a bug in 4.1; then i use 4.2 to
> check to see if the problem is solved. problems still in.
>
> see ka_4_2_0.log
>
> ka_4_2_0.log
> <https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5x1TDtoeVvAckdMbDRmT3E3UjA/edit?usp=drive_web>
>
>
> 2014-10-20 17:48 GMT+08:00 张顺通 <shuntongzhang at gmail.com>:
>
>> ka.log is genrate by kamailio 4.1.6.
>>
>> 2014-10-20 17:44 GMT+08:00 Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Are you using 4.1 or 4.2?
>>>
>>> Because the subject mentioned 4.2 but the version of kamailio is 4.1
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> On 20/10/14 11:39, 张顺通 wrote:
>>> > -M 12 can not help. all config is same.
>>> >
>>> > see ka.log in attachment, kamailio version is 4.1.6
>>> >
>>> > version: kamailio 4.1.6 (x86_64/linux) 010d57
>>> >
>>> > flags: STATS: Off, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS,
>>> > DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MEM, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC,
>>> > DBG_QM_MALLOC, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE,
>>> > USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES
>>> >
>>> > ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS=1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_LISTEN 16,
>>> > MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 4MB
>>> >
>>> > poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
>>> >
>>> > id: 010d57
>>> >
>>> > compiled on 16:48:03 Oct 20 2014 with gcc 4.1.2
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>>> http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierlahttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20141020/41e01717/attachment.html>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list