30 Apr
2012
30 Apr
'12
6:37 p.m.
As reported in ticket #55 SGSN can crash due to double free-ing. You
can replace 'can' by 'will' in that last phrase. I had a sift through
the code and tried to solve this by removing the free in gprs_ns.c.
Whenever the calling function created the msgb-struct, I have made the
function free it after its use. If the function got the msgb from a
calling function, there will not be a free (hoping that will be done
on the higher level).
HTH/F
6 May
6 May
6:47 p.m.
On 04/30/2012 05:37 PM, Frank Maas wrote:
Dear Frans,
thanks a lot for your work, I would like to encourage you to revise the patch
in several ways. There are some soft factors like using tabs, following the
kernel coding style (e.g. not if and msgb_free) on the same line but also some
technical issues.
7:05 p.m.
Hello Holgor,
You are probably right, no, you are most certainly right.
However I was facing a rather strict deadline and found that (a)
people had reported this and (b) nobody had solved it. Using this
patch at least people can go forward in using and trying. When
creating this patch I saw that there is no proper line in when
"ownership" moves, i.e. who gets responsiblity for free'ing objects.
As said: my time was limited and I encountered this project only days
before making this patch. So I had no real possibility to really
change the core approach.
As I am not sure if we are going to follow through with this path, my
thoughts were to share this with you. One can make use of it (at least
over days SGSN no longer crashed), or (better) straighten up the code
and solve this. I hope it will help someone.
Regards,
Frank
9:50 p.m.
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Peter Stuge <peter(a)stuge.se> wrote:
VID - Frank Maas wrote:
You are right. The GPRS setup was far from excellent. Not only the
nanoBTS had problems (restarting), but also the GPRS connection(s)
itself were not stable. However, before patching the issue described
in #55, sgsn would crash within 0 - 4 hours after being started. After
the patch SGSN never crashed and in a setup with only two GPRS users
we have had succes for over a 24 hour period. Which was remarkably
good. When using for the real purpose we had more BTS's and more GPRS
users and that still... erh... needs some work.
Regards,
Frank
,
One can make use of it (at least over days SGSN
no longer crashed),
You still saw the issues with the nanoBTS, right?
7 May
7 May
1:26 a.m.
On 05/06/2012 06:05 PM, VID - Frank Maas wrote:
Hello Holgor,
Hi Frank,
first of all I am happy you patched the software and that you shared it with
us. I don't think any of the current developers have the time to properly fix
it (I did create the issue to not forget about it). So I wonder and try to
encourage you to walk the extra mile(s) with us to fix that issue once and for
all.
As I am not sure if we are going to follow through
with this path, my
thoughts were to share this with you. One can make use of it (at least
over days SGSN no longer crashed), or (better) straighten up the code
and solve this. I hope it will help someone.
Ideally we would like to help you to create a patch that fixes this issue once
and for all.
holger
11:14 a.m.
Hi Holger,
I share your thoughts and I welcome the idea of making a proper patch.
However, as said, I am not sure if we are going to follow through on
this path.
If we are (and we could because we bought 2 BTS's, where we hired the
other 8), this means that I have more time than I had now. So it gives
me the possibility to have a proper look at your code and as a
consequence get a good understanding of it. Which helps in creating a
proper patch...
For the time I had for this project, this was the best I could do. I
was 'bailing' the boat, not repairing it. Until we have decided how to
go on, I'll be in listening mode to this mailinglist.
Kind regards,
Frank
4424
days inactive
4431
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Frank Maas -
Holger Hans Peter Freyther -
Peter Stuge -
VID - Frank Maas