Lock order assertion failure

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 16:11 +0100, Lukasz Zalewski wrote:
> On 21/09/12 16:07, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 14:22 +0100, Lukasz Zalewski wrote:
> >> On 19/09/12 19:05, David Rivera wrote:
> >>> Hi Ricky,
> >>>
> >>> Yep you're right, it is a different panic than the one you had. I posted
> >>> the info in my previous email but I should have included it again.
> >>> Here is the backtrace:  http://pastebin.com/Z5R0sXHZ . Samba Version
> >>> 4.1.0pre1-GIT-ea96d79.
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >> I'm also experiencing smbd crashes (more less daily) using
> >> 4.1.0pre1-GIT-ea96d79.
> >>
> >> Here is an sniplet from the log file:
> >> [2012/09/21 12:23:24.576002,  0]
> >> ../lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:193(dbwrap_check_lock_order)
> >>     Lock order violation: Trying
> >> /usr/local/samba/var/lock/smbXsrv_session_global.tdb at 1 while
> >> /usr/local/samba/var/lock/locking.tdb at 1 is locked
> >> [2012/09/21 12:23:24.576148,  0]
> >> ../lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:133(debug_lock_order)
> >>     lock order:  1:/usr/local/samba/var/lock/locking.tdb 2:<none>  3:<none>
> >> [2012/09/21 12:23:24.576236,  0] ../source3/lib/util.c:810(smb_panic_s3)
> >>     PANIC (pid 25048): invalid lock_order
> >
> > Thanks Lukasz,
> >
> > Can you please file a bug with this.  This is different to the previous
> > crashes, as this is a deliberate assertion attempting to avoid
> > deadlocks.  As such, at least we understand why we assert, if not why we
> > got there.
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> Would you like me to do it now with the above info, or with complete 
> backtrace (i need to wait for it to happen again)?

It looks like metze just fixed this in master.  Can you check out master
and confirm?

Thanks,

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org