samba - Jul 2004 - Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: 3.0.4: smbd's + nscd's = 100% CPU; load> 4

>> I checked my /etc/group for irregular entries and repaired
>> all of them. Since then the problem didn't occur any more.
>> Even so it wasn't very frequent.
>>
>> I still have a bunch of strace logs of smbd and of nscd.
>> Cann I upload it somewhere for you if you can use it?
>>
>> Or do you suggest to replant the erroneous entries and
>> wait for the loop ?
>
> Actually if you could add one erroneous entry and catch it
> in gdb in the act of looping that would be very helpful. I'm
> still trying to determine if the bug is in glibc or smbd.
Noblesse oblige.

OK. I've never debugged runaway programs.
Does it stay still when I attach it?
Should I compile a debug version for that?
Can you be just a little more specific
as to what I should try to clarify?

You seem to believe, that it is not
looping in samba sources, because you
can't see where it possibly could.

So probably, if the attached process
can be stepped, I should step a full
circle between two socket calls and
see if it ever lands back in samba
code. Is that it?

Cheers

---------

Diese E-Mail k?nnte vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich gesch?tzte
Informationen enthalten. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder
diese E-Mail irrt?mlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den
Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die
unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail sind nicht gestattet.

This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
e-mail is strictly forbidden.

----------

On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 12:57:22AM +0200, Dragan.Krnic@bahn.de
wrote:
> >> I checked my /etc/group for irregular entries and repaired
> >> all of them. Since then the problem didn't occur any more.
> >> Even so it wasn't very frequent.
> >>
> >> I still have a bunch of strace logs of smbd and of nscd.
> >> Cann I upload it somewhere for you if you can use it?
> >>
> >> Or do you suggest to replant the erroneous entries and
> >> wait for the loop ?
> >
> > Actually if you could add one erroneous entry and catch it
> > in gdb in the act of looping that would be very helpful. I'm
> > still trying to determine if the bug is in glibc or smbd.
> 
> Noblesse oblige.
> 
> OK. I've never debugged runaway programs.
> Does it stay still when I attach it?
> Should I compile a debug version for that?
> Can you be just a little more specific
> as to what I should try to clarify?
> 
> You seem to believe, that it is not
> looping in samba sources, because you
> can't see where it possibly could.
> 
> So probably, if the attached process
> can be stepped, I should step a full
> circle between two socket calls and
> see if it ever lands back in samba
> code. Is that it?
Yes, that's the idea. You need to compile with -g
option and then to attach to the process once it's
looping. Then set a breakpoint in the smbd code at
the point I referred to and see if it ever arrives
there. If it does follow it along until it loops again.

Thanks,

Jeremy.