From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from mx1.dfw.automattic.com (mx1.dfw.automattic.com [192.0.84.151]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E4C91F4B4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:36:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.dfw.automattic.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3E21C1E29 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:36:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=automattic.com; h=content-type:content-type:subject:subject:message-id:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:received :received:received:received:received; s=automattic1; t= 1611596208; bh=mJgabEPCdDWu5IOrNUGSOQ1cjKAuh7YzPAXY8p587EY=; b=P 00ltCvWiHHi8x6xV26RSArbLU/gAw88k76PDRqnWfLm5yqlNF5UoceBrH9iGhsud Ve2b28q0f1yICeFP1QHDDWhZlxFdTnyGXWGSPEBt++Srz+LhYcCpvZ387JiL/wNZ C36KfV7qoIvXxNaZMXP/S1C/qFQGAl3zKBsRNuXVmb6lnosT6ZcsXPLyg+j30Cte fyGMJBLN6IFUqsAWvtdESAE0AYLpbf5OyBkG3KKHXkPXxWBYgmtdi73Vzz9MspAR E/2sLz8lNQgkbY/q+URP+M2a/TPlD6z97QZeFqDm+45kqndnGz/XuNBNxLuzLh4P Ezwpxf85gsxbjKIqQZo1w== X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at wordpress.com Received: from mx1.dfw.automattic.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx1.dfw.automattic.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cy5HtIw103Hf for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:36:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp-gw.dca.automattic.com (smtp-gw.dca.automattic.com [192.0.97.210]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.dfw.automattic.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC6841C1BCF for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:36:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.automattic.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=automattic.com header.i=@automattic.com header.b="dDpSA4oj"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=a8c-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@a8c-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="YZb60L4l"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from smtp-gw.dca.automattic.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-gw.dca.automattic.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69471A0997 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:36:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=automattic.com; s=automattic1; t=1611596208; bh=mJgabEPCdDWu5IOrNUGSOQ1cjKAuh7YzPAXY8p587EY=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=dDpSA4ojt9/72w2XDYtF7mvOpki76Ml7Vuro5gqpNn8DUO15YEli/5/C8Nw8ije7R jWO4Ua3hnXe6NMFl7usDGofiodXa/ULpPDKqEFgxs8xVwiQXFz36h9RrricKPpyuFU KY+BE7DQQzUaSjJRi0FhS6csJHimj3ncocQ9EjdS6ywLfX1RdPeWTBcUnOe3DnkJqj CACG8sc+EaJXDkG6xUdTxuAnITTqyUbA3pSOuhNzwL9IKegJZwjssgelOEvLw6x3G8 pkiUdKexzXrdISvpxxXS8b+38Nuvcbx7aNgplfGZkOpzzhm00De5cIfkT6slwO573u 919gKrSYRGPsQ== Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-gw.dca.automattic.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52A88A0945 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:36:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id h25so5017191wmb.6 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:36:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=a8c-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mJgabEPCdDWu5IOrNUGSOQ1cjKAuh7YzPAXY8p587EY=; b=YZb60L4lPY/EwIwaEMhCDJTJeNA9Jh/xnGsg0NBIAfROjASi45W+1PCs9XDO8qRPsC kcNl3Z30bqEgzxlUr78mEtrCNVycidWQXDFc7mZSA/rHtxn/JL7fydCQILm5QZdLyggR WVv3kJe6bNFlzbh6M7QNnv3BEf3BeSEurdC1jmFjF2Bn9tLZyYk8bIMzX4FA1CcirXP4 RwOvKk1EQkjc5pW+sEUfBtVXQw00DJQ3soLimVxdd4qBvA7TlNeeT4JHMeKv3cNZ6rUI d26JdkBC5QWiO761FSuK47ZF4tEbRaaBzDvve2CSJheMDEUZzu9O84JCNs3C22ur3Z3p tAqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mJgabEPCdDWu5IOrNUGSOQ1cjKAuh7YzPAXY8p587EY=; b=JxhdE4ZRKVLVz3SoYewsjr8Slu5pYEmArG2H9zqpdjTGpV4k2GoTi8TZGvMzbWHrOP bRaFnl108G26/9RN0p9bEFAecQq2dCt8zjTmb3w4kNxPjl5qV7B3Jy7lprYtKD+HEIrm 4YqZ+PxGqXKMCzjDynR5xR5dZV7BDnJJSrNQ+f2oh80NNiX2sx828XkMxEUxIShTurFz guAQ8Aa6/74hsT+vDoJCa3wleK2IINo4qyNr2Yw/R186kGazL+t+FhqrlAdZJKk8CKl6 6lliO+tDCqJxrafqik/YJnT7HLiS6S40aOnX9Xn7oQ+CyPNskl8pPt0FBFxjSGCzOHC6 Fv6A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Ljvg+bsPAhaU2CQbrwP3BBC4hzYR8RtA2By8Ok8X5AtlIUuwU gXhp5M7VQRNlAAf/6JVGzKODb4fsdJVI8i7JDIFbt5o1Sj9LlfS8doojHeIyMk5jneAnBBDqyrz StCLOZAFXSvUma1xSAA/DTuNyo7n2mYWkclvL9Q== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:acc9:: with SMTP id v192mr1127001wme.174.1611596207437; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:36:47 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxxIbSg+pO/p3lEsw6JD+BxpMvqHaA3M4Mh0Aj8xBc6002pPNrpy5v0jJY6CFmBfBsWXss2FLfSSVpFD77WEbQ= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:acc9:: with SMTP id v192mr1126987wme.174.1611596207176; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:36:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210111212621.GA12555@dcvr> <20210117095109.GA28219@dcvr> <20210120085745.GB29704@dcvr> <20210120212229.GA25024@dcvr> In-Reply-To: <20210120212229.GA25024@dcvr> From: Xiao Yu Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:36:34 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Segfaults on http_close? To: Eric Wong Cc: Xiao Yu , Arkadi Colson , cmogstored-public@yhbt.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-Id: On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 9:22 PM Eric Wong wrote: > > Xiao Yu wrote: > > That's good to know, would it help if I applied the patch and then > > compiled with the older compiler to check? > > Yes, that would be tremendously helpful, thanks. > > > Would non-daemonized mode and capturing stderr provide more verbosity? We've been running the patched version compiled with the older GCC for a couple days now and so far so good and hopefully I can provide more details if it does crash again in the future. Thanks again for all your help!