[zeromq-dev] mailbox.cpp Assertion

[Thomas S Hatch]

No, I am confident that we are not passing sockets through threads or
processes.
Could this have anything to do with closing and re opening connections?

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:

> Hi Thomas,
>
> Can you definitely exclude that sockets end up in the wrong thread? I
> mean, are you at any time passing socket handles between threads?
>
> -Pieter
>
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a report of an assertion in Salt. It is very rare and I cannot
> > reliably reproduce it. The user that has reported it gave me a strace
> output
> > which makes it look like the assertion is happening in a multiprocess. I
> am
> > aware that you cannot have the same socket call from another thread or
> > process, but I see no indication that this is the case.
> >
> > Here is the trace:
> >
> > 14:51:29.164045 epoll_wait(9, {{EPOLLIN, {u32=44624800, u64=44624800}}},
> > 256, 4294967295) = 1
> > 14:51:55.130374 poll([{fd=8, events=POLLIN}], 1, 0) = 1 ([{fd=8,
> > revents=POLLIN}])
> > 14:51:55.130428 write(2, "Assertion failed: ok (mailbox.cpp:84)\n", 38)
> = -1
> > EBADF (Bad file descriptor)
> > 14:51:55.130466 rt_sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, [ABRT], NULL, 8) = 0
> > 14:51:55.130500 tgkill(5969, 5980, SIGABRT) = 0
> > 14:51:55.130530 --- SIGABRT (Aborted) @ 0 (0) ---
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > zeromq-dev mailing list
> > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20120709/d05c1cd9/attachment.htm>