[Kamailio-Users] [sr-dev] kamailio / deadlock3

[Aymeric Moizard]

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:

> On 1/28/10 8:40 PM, Aymeric Moizard wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, 28 Jan 2010, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jan 28, 2010 at 14:56, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> I am cc-ing sr-dev, since tcp code is from ser and Andrei may have more
>>>> insights...
>>> 
>>> Is this kamailio 1.5 or kamailio 3.0 (looks like <3.0 to me)?
>> 
>> This is branches/1.5
>> With svn version 5949.
> I thought it is 3.0.0, as all your other emails were related to this version.

Sorry, I though I did mentioned it in my initial mail (sent on kamailio 
mailing list) however, it waz not the case.

I would have asked on ser-users if it was 3.0 ;)

> On another hand, if you run 1.x is better to use the last one, 1.5.3.

I'm pretty sure it's 1.5.3: changelog starts with:
===================== 2009-10-XX Kamailio v1.5.3 released =====================

Regards,
Aymeric

> Please include the version when you report a problem, otherwise we can hunt 
> in difference places.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>> 
>> Here is the debug backtrace: with kamailio-dbg_1.5.0_i386.deb installed:
>> 
>> (gdb) bt
>> #0  0xffffe424 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
>> #1  0xb7d694ac in sched_yield () from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6
>> #2  0x080a93fd in tcp_send (send_sock=0x8159d60, type=3,
>>     buf=0xb3992908 "SUBSCRIBE sip:aymeric2 at mobipouce.com 
>> SIP/2.0\r\nRecord-Route: 
>> <sip:91.121.81.212:5061;transport=tls;r2=on;lr=on>\r\nRecord-Route: 
>> <sip:91.121.81.212;r2=on;lr=on>\r\nVia: SIP/2.0/TLS 
>> 91.121.81.212:5061;branc"..., len=645, to=0xb392f494, id=0) at 
>> fastlock.h:182
>> #3  0xb79ef679 in send_pr_buffer (rb=0xb392f480, buf=0xb3992908, len=645) 
>> at ../../forward.h:127
>> #4  0xb79f29ac in t_forward_nonack (t=0xb392f368, p_msg=0x81d02d8, 
>> proxy=0x0) at t_fwd.c:691
>> #5  0xb79ee784 in t_relay_to (p_msg=0x81d02d8, proxy=0x0, flags=<value 
>> optimized out>) at t_funcs.c:264
>> #6  0xb79fda11 in w_t_relay (p_msg=0x81d02d8, proxy=0x0, flags=0x0) at 
>> tm.c:1002
>> #7  0x080551ef in do_action (a=0x8172100, msg=0x81d02d8) at action.c:874
>> #8  0x080577df in run_action_list (a=0x8172100, msg=0x81d02d8) at 
>> action.c:145
>> #9  0x0808f11b in eval_expr (e=0x8172168, msg=0x81d02d8, val=0x0) at 
>> route.c:1171
>> #10 0x0808ebb0 in eval_expr (e=0x8172190, msg=0x81d02d8, val=0x0) at 
>> route.c:1488
>> #11 0x0808eb3f in eval_expr (e=0x81721b8, msg=0x81d02d8, val=0x0) at 
>> route.c:1493
>> #12 0x08055005 in do_action (a=0x81722d0, msg=0x81d02d8) at action.c:729
>> #13 0x080577df in run_action_list (a=0x8171928, msg=0x81d02d8) at 
>> action.c:145
>> #14 0x08055e49 in do_action (a=0x816ba50, msg=0x81d02d8) at action.c:120
>> #15 0x080577df in run_action_list (a=0x816ba50, msg=0x81d02d8) at 
>> action.c:145
>> #16 0x08056d0f in do_action (a=0x816bab8, msg=0x81d02d8) at action.c:746
>> #17 0x080577df in run_action_list (a=0x81618c0, msg=0x81d02d8) at 
>> action.c:145
>> #18 0x08057b93 in run_top_route (a=0x81618c0, msg=0x81d02d8) at 
>> action.c:120
>> #19 0x08083a0d in receive_msg (
>>     buf=0x81341c0 "SUBSCRIBE sip:aymeric2 at mobipouce.com SIP/2.0\r\nVia: 
>> SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.2.3:6010;rport;branch=z9hG4bK972183375\r\nFrom: 
>> \"aymeric\" <sip:antisip at sip.antisip.com>;tag=286101806\r\nTo: 
>> <sip:aymeric2 at mobipouce."..., len=692, rcv_info=0xbfc9ad54) at 
>> receive.c:175
>> #20 0x080b3943 in udp_rcv_loop () at udp_server.c:460
>> #21 0x0806b294 in main (argc=-1211358212, argv=0xb7f61590) at main.c:774
>> 
>> One thing that didn't came up before is that it seems the message
>> is containing TLS, not TCP. I don't have time to analyse it now
>> deeper, but I may try to change the SRV to see how it differ.
>> 
>> Tks,
>> Aymeric
>
> -- 
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
> * http://www.asipto.com/
>
>