Re: serf w/SurfShield crash in authz_tests.py#15

2012-06-14 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > I know pf(4) on openbsd has some specific "Be unreliable" options. > Would they be useful for this? Since we're using TCP, I expect that such pf filters would just cause delays that TCP would essentially recover from and might not even be vi

Re: serf w/SurfShield crash in authz_tests.py#15

2012-06-14 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Justin Erenkrantz wrote on Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 15:52:17 +0200: > It was a good way of capturing some of the more subtle race conditions > that we've never triggered reliably elsewhere. -- justin I know pf(4) on openbsd has some specific "Be unreliable" options. Would they be useful for this? Fo

Re: serf w/SurfShield crash in authz_tests.py#15

2012-06-14 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > Great! I can now successfully run the entire testsuite over ra_serf > with AVG SurfShield enabled. For the first time ever :-). Yay! > Thanks for all the bugfixes. No problem. Thanks for providing the underpowered laptop with the nutty

Re: serf w/SurfShield crash in authz_tests.py#15

2012-06-14 Thread Johan Corveleyn
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: >> With latest trunk (@1349944) I get a crash in authz_tests.py 15 >> ("authz issue #3242 - access required at repo root") when running with > > I have confirmed on your machine t

Re: serf w/SurfShield crash in authz_tests.py#15

2012-06-14 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > With latest trunk (@1349944) I get a crash in authz_tests.py 15 > ("authz issue #3242 - access required at repo root") when running with I have confirmed on your machine that the fix in r1350179 doesn't cause a crash any more. Thanks! -

Re: serf w/SurfShield crash in authz_tests.py#15

2012-06-13 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
handler->handler_pool is somehow NULL when we invoke get_locations. Weird. Perhaps you can throw some printf's before the get_locations call to see if it is indeed NULL and not an artifact of the trace. A quick glance at the code shows handler_pool should be set in add_file correctly. -- justin