Re: (ITS#6096) 2.4.16 replica segfault

[hyc@symas.com]

Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
> hyc@symas.com wrote:
>> Luca Scamoni wrote:
>>> hyc@symas.com ha scritto:
>>>> Apparently the name of the entry in the consumer doesn't match the name of the
>>>> entry received from the provider.
>>>>
>>> Yes, but this is very strange. This is a migration from 2.3.37 to 2.4.16
>>> done through slapcat/slapadd procedure on the master.
>>>> In frame 5, print *entry
>>>>
>>> (gdb) frame 5
>>> #5  0x080f39f4 in syncrepl_entry (si=0x8fdebf8, op=0x380acf0,
>>> entry=0x54eba5f4, modlist=0x380aaf4, syncstate=2, syncUUID=0x380ab50,
>>> syncCSN=0x4d3e0388)
>>>       at ../../../servers/slapd/syncrepl.c:2278
>>> 2278    ../../../servers/slapd/syncrepl.c: No such file or directory.
>>>           in ../../../servers/slapd/syncrepl.c
>>> (gdb) p *entry
>>> $1 = {e_id = 0, e_name = {bv_len = 0, bv_val = 0x4d3691c8 ""}, e_nname =
>>> {bv_len = 0, bv_val = 0x4d31cff8 ""}, e_attrs = 0x54a371fc, e_ocflags =
>>> 0, e_bv = {
>>>       bv_len = 0, bv_val = 0x0}, e_private = 0x0}
>>>
>> Well, that's certainly odd looking. Did you have SYNC logging at the time, do
>> you have the log messages from just before this occurred?
>>
>> Can you print out the a_desc and values of all of the attributes in
>> entry->e_attrs ?
>
> Howard,
>
> what's odd is that, as far as I understand, entry->e_name is set after
> op->o_req_dn, inside syncrepl_message_to_entry(), which is just
> extracted and normalized from the message.  What could perhaps happen is
> that dnPrettyNormal() fails (in fact its result is not checked).  I'm
> adding a check and some logging, just in case.

Good idea.

Also, I think the original LDAP message should still be intact, in frame 6 
"msg" - perhaps you can extract the DN that was actually received and figure 
out why it had a problem.

-- 
   -- Howard Chu
   CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
   Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
   Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/