asterisk users - Aug 2023 - Encountered a crash, what is best way to tell if it has been fixed or now

I have a customer who just encountered a crash while running Asterisk 18.17.1
version.

I'm trying to adapt to the changes so not sure where best to look or how to
possibly report this.

I started by going through
https://github.com/asterisk/asterisk/compare/18.17.1...18.19.0 to see if any of
the changes seemed to apply to code reported by the backtrace.

Entirely possible I missed something, but I didn't notice anything that
applies.

I do see a commit was done today to the res_pjsip_nat.c file, but not sure if
that would apply to the issue.

Any suggestions for where I should look or ask?



(gdb) bt
#0  0x000055e7c091ed95 in __ao2_ref (user_data=user_data at entry=0x1,
delta=delta at entry=1, tag=tag at entry=0x0, file=file at entry=0x7f773800e012
"res_pjsip_session.c", line=line at entry=3639,
    func=func at entry=0x7f7738011d20 <__PRETTY_FUNCTION__.38105>
"ast_sip_dialog_get_session") at astobj2.c:501
#1  0x00007f773800a0da in ast_sip_dialog_get_session (dlg=dlg at
entry=0x7f777415de48) at res_pjsip_session.c:3639
#2  0x00007f773800d3e7 in session_outgoing_nat_hook (tdata=0x7f773c633ac8,
transport=0x7f7754082048) at res_pjsip_session.c:5567
#3  0x00007f773801965d in nat_invoke_hook (obj=<optimized out>, arg=arg at
entry=0x7f772c1a0a50, flags=flags at entry=0) at res_pjsip_nat.c:299
#4  0x000055e7c09218c0 in internal_ao2_traverse (self=self at
entry=0x7f774014cc18, flags=flags at entry=OBJ_SEARCH_NONE, cb_fn=cb_fn at
entry=0x7f7738019640 <nat_invoke_hook>, arg=arg at entry=0x7f772c1a0a50,
tag=tag at entry=0x0,
    file=file at entry=0x7f773801b009 "res_pjsip_nat.c",
line=<optimized out>, func=<optimized out>,
type=AO2_CALLBACK_DEFAULT, data=0x0) at astobj2_container.c:328
#5  0x000055e7c0921d79 in __ao2_callback (c=c at entry=0x7f774014cc18,
flags=flags at entry=OBJ_SEARCH_NONE, cb_fn=cb_fn at entry=0x7f7738019640
<nat_invoke_hook>, arg=arg at entry=0x7f772c1a0a50, tag=tag at entry=0x0,
    file=file at entry=0x7f773801b009 "res_pjsip_nat.c", line=470,
func=0x7f773801b4b8 <__PRETTY_FUNCTION__.29250> "process_nat")
at astobj2_container.c:414
#6  0x00007f7738019ddf in process_nat (tdata=0x7f773c633ac8) at
res_pjsip_nat.c:470
#7  nat_on_tx_message (tdata=0x7f773c633ac8) at res_pjsip_nat.c:479
#8  0x00007f777bc6fc66 in ?? ()
#9  0x00007f777bc71610 in ?? ()
#10 0x00007f773c633ac8 in ?? ()
#11 0x000055e7c1ac7708 in ?? ()
#12 0x00007f777bc77c69 in ?? ()
#13 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()

Have a good day!
Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20230809/96333812/attachment.html>

On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:20 PM Dan Cropp <dcropp at amtelco.com> wrote:
> I have a customer who just encountered a crash while running Asterisk
> 18.17.1 version.
>
>
>
> I’m trying to adapt to the changes so not sure where best to look or how
> to possibly report this.
>
>
>
> I started by going through
> https://github.com/asterisk/asterisk/compare/18.17.1...18.19.0 to see if
> any of the changes seemed to apply to code reported by the backtrace.
>
>
>
> Entirely possible I missed something, but I didn’t notice anything that
> applies.
>
>
>
> I do see a commit was done today to the res_pjsip_nat.c file, but not sure
> if that would apply to the issue.
>
>
>
> Any suggestions for where I should look or ask?
>
That is how you generally look, by seeing the commits between the two
versions, analyzing, and seeing if anything is relevant.

Issues themselves are reported on Github. I can say already though that the
backtrace is incomplete and doesn't show the full story of what happened,
it may be optimized or something.

-- 
Joshua C. Colp
Asterisk Project Lead
Sangoma Technologies
Check us out at www.sangoma.com and www.asterisk.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20230809/87cfc7a0/attachment.html>