Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: NFS related panic? (was: Re: Killing a zombie process?)



On Tue 20 Oct 2015 at 01:04:59 +0200, Rhialto wrote:
> with a rebuilt netbsd.gdb (hopefully the addresses match)
> 
> #5  0xffffffff806b94b4 in nfs_sigintr (nmp=0x0, rep=0xfffffe81163730a8,
> l=0x0) at ../../../../nfs/nfs_socket.c:871

nmp should not be NULL here... let's look at rep, where it comes from
via "nmp = rep->r_nmp;"

(gdb) print *(struct nfsreq *)0xfffffe81163730a8
$1 = {r_chain = {tqe_next = 0xfffffe811edcee40, tqe_prev = 0x1}, r_mreq = 0xffff8000028f9888, r_mrep = 0x0, r_md = 0x0, r_dpos = 0x0, r_nmp = 0x0, r_xid = 0, r_flags = 0, r_retry = 0, r_rexmit = 0, r_procnum = 0, r_rtt = 0, 
  r_lwp = 0x0}

well, r_chain.tqe_prev looks bogus (unless that's a special marker), so
let's look at tqe_next:

(gdb) print *((struct nfsreq *)0xfffffe81163730a8)->r_chain.tqe_next
$3 = {r_chain = {tqe_next = 0x0, tqe_prev = 0x15aa3c85d}, r_mreq = 0xbd83e8af8fe58282, r_mrep = 0x81e39981e3a781e3, r_md = 0xe39d81e38180e38c, r_dpos = 0x8890e5b4a0e5ae81, r_nmp = 0xe57baf81e3ab81e3, r_xid = 2179183259, 
  r_flags = -1565268289, r_retry = 0, r_rexmit = 0, r_procnum = 1520683101, r_rtt = 1, r_lwp = 0x80e39981e3a781e3}

well, even more bogus. Too bad that the next frame has its argument
optimized out...

-Olaf.
-- 
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert  -- The Doctor: No, 'eureka' is Greek for
\X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl    -- 'this bath is too hot.'

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index