Re: do we consider using patchwork ?

2019-05-23 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Aleks, On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 08:05:18AM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > From my point of view is the ci and issue tacker a good step forward but for > now we should try to focus on the list as it is still the main communication > channel. I mean, there are multiple valid communication

Re: SD-termination cause

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Maksim, On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 01:47:30PM +0300, ?? ? wrote: > Hi! > > I've run into some weird problem of many connections failed with SD status > in log. And I have no idea how to discover the source of the problem. > > >From the point of client it looks like this: > * Client

Re: do we consider using patchwork ?

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 01:29:53AM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > if we do not like using github PR and Willy receives 2k emails a day... > do we consider using something like that > https://patchwork.openvpn.net/project/openvpn2/list/ ? At least not now, please let's slow

[ANNOUNCE] haproxy-2.0-dev4

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
ion forceclose' actually warn MEDIUM: Make 'resolution_pool_size' directive fatal BUG/MINOR: mworker: Fix memory leak of mworker_proc members William Lallemand (1): MINOR: init: setenv HAPROXY_CFGFILES Willy Tarreau (61): DOC: management: place "show activity" at the

Re: cirrus-ci is red

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 03:24:25PM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > someone is reviewing this https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/runs/133866993 > ? So apparently we don't have _POSIX_C_SOURCE >= 199309L there, which contradicts the promise in my linux man pages :-/ The docs on opengroup

Re: [PATCH v2] BUILD: add sanitizers to travis-ci builds

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 08:14:11PM +0500, ??? wrote: > done thank you :-) By the way I was thinking that we should probably start to use the "ci" tag on patch subject lines to cover travis and cirrus. This way even if you perform cross-ci changes (build options etc) you can put them in

Re: [PATCH v2] BUILD: add sanitizers to travis-ci builds

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 06:37:58PM +0500, ??? wrote: > build is green now, we can apply this patch (I skipped "linux-ppc64le" for > a while) It's really easier for me if you attach it again. I'm getting about 2k emails a day and having to do dig through archives to pick one

HAProxyConf 2019

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi all! As a few of you may remember, we had a small-group HAProxy workshop 3 years ago to see if it would be useful to meet from time to time and it was a great success that we've been impatient to re-edit but much wider, and not limited to developers. Well, time flies, I'm a terrible organizer

Re: [PATCH] wurfl device detection fixes

2019-05-22 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Massimiliano, On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:23:16PM +0200, Massimiliano Bellomi wrote: > Hi All. > > Here attached you may find a new set of patches related to WURFL module > that should address Christopher and Willy suggestion. Thank you, I've applied them. I tried to add some info to the

Re: [PATCH] DOC: fix successful typo

2019-05-18 Thread Willy Tarreau
applied, thanks Bertrand. Willy

Re: Host header and sni extension differ

2019-05-18 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 09:23:59PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy: I wonder if that's something HAProxy itself should detect: When a > client certificate is provided for a connection and the Host header does > not match the SNI then an 421 is sent automatically (that behaviour of > course

Re: [PATCH] MINOR: sample: add ssl_sni_check converter

2019-05-18 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi guys, On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 09:58:17PM +0200, bjun...@gmail.com wrote: > Am Fr., 17. Mai 2019 um 21:15 Uhr schrieb Tim Düsterhus : > > > > Willy, > > > > Am 23.12.18 um 21:20 schrieb Moemen MHEDHBI: > > > Hi, > > > > > > The attached patch adds the ssl_sni_check converter which returns true

Re: Host header and sni extension differ

2019-05-17 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 08:05:33PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > With HAProxy 1.9 you should be able to use the strcmp converter I > contributed like this: > > http-request set-var(txn.host) hdr(host) > # Check whether the client is attempting domain fronting. > acl

Re: Host header and sni extension differ

2019-05-17 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Jarno, On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 06:49:56PM +0300, Jarno Huuskonen wrote: > Do the myapp.io and anotherapp.com share same certificate (ie. > certificate has both myapp.io and anotherapp.com SAN) ? > > AFAIK browser can reuse the same tls connection if the certificate > covers both names.

Re: significantly different address sanitizer findings for "x86_64" and "ppc64le"

2019-05-17 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 02:04:06PM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > I'm going to enable address sanitizer in travis-ci. > > x86_64: (known leak) > https://travis-ci.org/chipitsine/haproxy-1/jobs/533196875 > > ppc64le: > https://travis-ci.org/chipitsine/haproxy-1/jobs/533196874

Re: PATCH: enable cirrus-ci (freebsd builds)

2019-05-17 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Tim, On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 07:53:03PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > Am 16.05.19 um 09:42 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > > If in the mean time you know how to verify that it was properly enabled > > and builds there, and share with us the link to consult the status,

Re: [PATCH] wurfl device detection fixes

2019-05-17 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Massimiliano, On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 08:17:34AM +0200, Massimiliano Bellomi wrote: > Thank you Christopher. > > Is it fine for you if I send a 9th patch which fixes the 3rd one ? ( ...so > patches still be applied in sequence from 1 to 9, patch 3 included ) No, please never submit a patch

Re: Need help on CVE-2019-11323

2019-05-16 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 02:54:05AM +, ??? wrote: > Recently I found an issue CVE-2019-11323, it already fixed in 1.9.7 > > But it looks like all other haproxy branches affected by this issue according > to the following link. > > > https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2019-11323/ > >

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Kill deprecated configuration options

2019-05-16 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Aleks, On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 09:09:08PM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > > The obvious `http-request set-path %[path,regsub(...)]` as suggested in > > the docs for `http-request set-query` does *NOT* work, because the > > `regsub` parameters cannot contain the closing parenthesis required

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Kill deprecated configuration options

2019-05-16 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Tim, On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 05:09:31PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > Am 15.05.19 um 11:31 schrieb Tim Düsterhus: > >>> 2. 'req*' and 'rsp*'. I remember that they allow some modification that > >>>cannot easily be replicated otherwise (but I'll have to check that > >>>

Re: PATCH: enable cirrus-ci (freebsd builds)

2019-05-16 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 01:12:40AM +0500, ??? wrote: > in order to enable builds, the following steps must be taken > > 1) must be enabled (using owner account) on > https://github.com/marketplace/cirrus-ci , also "haproxy/haproxy" repo > should be enabled there > 2) build

Re: PATCH: enable cirrus-ci (freebsd builds)

2019-05-15 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 12:05:47AM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > can we enable cirrus-ci ? it's like travis-ci, it allows run freebsd builds I have no opinion on it, I don't know anything about it at all, so since you appear to know what it involves, you'll have to give me

[ANNOUNCE] haproxy-2.0-dev3

2019-05-15 Thread Willy Tarreau
OR: mworker: don't exit with an ambiguous value BUG/MINOR: mworker: ensure that we still quits with SIGINT MINOR: systemd: support /etc/sysconfig/ for redhat based distrib MINOR: mworker: support a configurable maximum number of reloads BUG/MAJOR: ssl: segfault upon an heartb

Re: haproxy 1.9.6 segfault in srv_update_status

2019-05-15 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Patrick, On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 01:22:41AM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > We haven't had a chance to update to 1.9.8 yet, so we're still running 1.9.6 > (Linux) in production, and just had 2 segfaults happen a little over an hour > apart. When I look at the core dumps from them, the stack

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Kill deprecated configuration options

2019-05-14 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Aleks, On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 05:51:25AM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > For example such a generic replacement could be like this? > > http://cbonte.github.io/haproxy-dconv/1.9/configuration.html#4.2-reqrep > > # replace "/static/" with "/" at the beginning of any request path. > reqrep

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Kill deprecated configuration options

2019-05-14 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Tim, On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 08:57:55PM +0200, Tim Duesterhus wrote: > Okay, I did a sweep through the configuration parser and: > > 1. Made deprecated directives fatal and removed them from the docs. The >error messages speak of "HAProxy 2.1", thus it should be merged into >some kind

[ANNOUNCE] haproxy-1.9.8

2019-05-13 Thread Willy Tarreau
DOC: Fix typo in keyword matrix BUG/MINOR: vars: Fix memory leak in vars_check_arg Willy Tarreau (17): BUG/MEDIUM: mux-h2: properly deal with too large headers frames BUG/MAJOR: map/acl: real fix segfault during show map/acl on CLI BUG/MEDIUM: checks: make sure the warmup task take

Re: HAProxy 1.9.6 unresponsive

2019-05-13 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Patrick, On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:18:21AM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > There's been mention of releasing 1.9.8. Will that release contain a fix for > the issue reported in this thread? Sorry, I mixed it with the other ones speaking about 100% CPU. I've re-read the whole thread and yours

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MINOR: Fix memory leak in cfg_parse_peers

2019-05-13 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:54:50PM +0200, Tim Duesterhus wrote: > cfg_parse_peers previously leaked the contents of the `kws` string, > as it was unconditionally filled using bind_dump_kws, but only used > (and freed) within the error case. (...) Applied, thanks Tim! Willy

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-13 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Maciej, On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 07:21:59AM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not observing any issues, so I think it's fixed. :) > > Willy, Olivier thank you very much! Great, thanks. I'm going to issue 1.9.8 with the patch I sent you then. However after discussing about it with

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MINOR: vars: Fix memory leak in vars_check_arg

2019-05-12 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 06:01:26PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > Am 11.05.19 um 05:53 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > >> diff --git a/src/vars.c b/src/vars.c > >> index 477a14632..d32310270 100644 > >> --- a/src/vars.c > >> +++ b/src/vars.c >

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-12 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 12:00:44PM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > As for now it is stable, no looping. I'll leave it till monday and return > with feedback! :) Many thanks Maciej for this positive feedback. I'll merge it and issue 1.9.8 then. There are definitely enough pending fixes for a release!

Re: [PATCH] new contrib proposal / exec Python & Lua scripts

2019-05-12 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 08:23:54AM +0200, Thierry Fournier wrote: > Hi Willy, > > Great ! I thinked this patch for the trash. You can merge this work. The > main goal is providing an environment to process spoe with lua or python. OK perfect, I'll take it for 2.0 then. Thank you! Willy

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-12 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 09:26:18AM +0300, Gil Bahat wrote: > none of these work for me to resolve the problem. guess it's a bit more > complicated than that. OK, thanks for trying at least. willy

Re: [PATCH] BUILD: common: Add __ha_cas_dw fallback for single threaded builds

2019-05-11 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 11:52:31AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Actually I think there's an additional change needed in my patch. By > > passing the parameters to HA_ATOMIC_CAS we end up attempting to > > dereference a void *. So this should needs to cast to a proper type.

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-11 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 11:01:42AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 10:52:35AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > I certainly made a few reasoning mistakes above but I don't see anything > > in the code preventing this case from happening. > > > &g

Re: HAProxy 1.9.6 unresponsive

2019-05-11 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Patrick, On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 09:17:25AM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > So I see a few updates on some of the other 100% CPU usage threads, and that > some fixes have been pushed. Are any of those in relation to this issue? Or > is this one still outstanding? Apparently we've pulled a long

Re: [PATCH] new contrib proposal / exec Python & Lua scripts

2019-05-11 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Thierry, I just stumbled upon the patch series below you sent a while ago. I see that you didn't receive any feedback on it, but see no reason not to merge it, as it must still be valid given that it's outside of the core. Do you have any objection against it getting merged ? Or maybe even a

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-11 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 10:52:35AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > I certainly made a few reasoning mistakes above but I don't see anything > in the code preventing this case from happening. > > Thus I'd like you to try the attached patch which is supposed to prevent > this scenario

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-11 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 09:56:18AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > I'm back to auditing the code to figure how we can free an h2s without > first detaching it from the lists. I hope to have yet another patch to > propose to you. So I'm seeing something which bothers me in the code.

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-11 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Maciej, On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 06:45:21PM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > Olivier, it's still looping, but differently: > > 2609list_for_each_entry_safe(h2s, h2s_back, >send_list, list) { > (gdb) n > 2610if (h2c->st0 >= H2_CS_ERROR || h2c->flags & > H2_CF_MUX_BLOCK_ANY) >

Re: [PATCH] BUILD: make TMPDIR global variable in travis-ci in order to show reg-tests errors

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 03:42:17PM +0500, ??? wrote: > this patch will reveal osx reg-tests errors (after osx build is repaired) > > ??, 10 ??? 2019 ?. ? 15:38, : > > > From: Ilya Shipitsin > > > > v2, rebased to master (...) Thanks Ilya, I've applied it. However, please in the

Re: haproxy stopped balancing after about 2 weeks

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 01:42:17PM -0600, ericr wrote: > resending my entire message because I didn't get subscribed in time... Didn't you get the response I've already sent ? Willy

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MINOR: vars: Fix memory leak in vars_check_arg

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 05:50:50PM +0200, Tim Duesterhus wrote: > vars_check_arg previously leaked the string containing the variable > name: (...) Thanks Tim! I'm going to apply a minor change : > diff --git a/src/vars.c b/src/vars.c > index 477a14632..d32310270 100644 > --- a/src/vars.c > +++

Re: [PATCH] BUILD: common: Add __ha_cas_dw fallback for single threaded builds

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 09:38:08AM +, Chris Packham wrote: > On 10/05/19 8:57 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 05:07:40PM +1200, Chris Packham wrote: > >> __ha_cas_dw() is used in fd_rm_from_fd_list() and when built without > >> USE_THREADS

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hello! On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 10:13:38PM +, Zakharychev, Bob wrote: > I wouldn't bother even trying to add support for BoringSSL - they themselves > discourage people from doing so in their mission statement: > > "Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general

Re: Fwd: Very odd behavior with 'cookie' only working intermittently

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 10:53:07AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 12:10:27PM -0400, Chris Patti wrote: (...) Just noticed that a thread sorting issue on my side brought this very old thread back and that this post is probably not interesting anymore to the initial reques

Re: [PATCH] BUILD: common: Add __ha_cas_dw fallback for single threaded builds

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 05:07:40PM +1200, Chris Packham wrote: > __ha_cas_dw() is used in fd_rm_from_fd_list() and when built without > USE_THREADS=1 the linker fails to find __ha_cas_dw(). Add a definition > of __ha_cas_dw() for the #ifndef USE_THREADS case. Just found your patch, I think it's

Re: Fwd: Very odd behavior with 'cookie' only working intermittently

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 12:10:27PM -0400, Chris Patti wrote: > Thank you *VERY* much for this tidbit Nenad. > > With the early version of HAProxy we're using (v1.3.18) the actual syntax > is: > > option httpclose > > This worked perfectly, session afinity started performing as expected. > >

Re: [PATCH] BUILD: add BoringSSL to travis-ci build matrix

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
merged, thank you Ilya. Willy

Re: CI question related to openssl matrix

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 12:19:45AM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > does haproxy have some issues when it is built using openssl-1.1.0 and > running with openssl-1.1.1, for example ? I don't know. I'd say that openssl guarantees ABI compatibility for low numbers (as you could

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Maciej, On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 07:25:54PM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > Hi again, > > I have bad news, HAProxy 1.9.7-35b44da still looping :/ Well, it's getting really annoying. Something's definitely wrong in this list and I can't figure what. > 2609list_for_each_entry_safe(h2s,

Re: haproxy stopped balancing after about 2 weeks

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hello, On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 11:42:54AM -0600, ericr wrote: > A couple of weeks ago I installed haproxy on our server running FreeBSD > 11.0-RELEASE-p16. (yes, I know it's an old version of the OS, I'm going to > upgrade it as soon as I solve my haproxy problem.) Can you tell us what exact

Re: Link error building haproxy-1.9.7

2019-05-10 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 08:59:44PM +, Chris Packham wrote: > >>haproxy-1.9.7/src/fd.c:267: undefined reference to `__ha_cas_dw' (...) > >>collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > >>Makefile:994: recipe for target 'haproxy' failed > >>make: *** [haproxy] Error 1 > >> > >>

Re: [PATCH] wurfl device detection build fixes and dummy library

2019-05-09 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Max, I'll respond on some points here. On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 06:03:58PM +0200, Massimiliano Bellomi wrote: > Hi Christopher, > > here Massimiliano, from Scientiamobile Engineering team. > > We started working on your suggestions. > > Doing this, I noticed that *send_log()* seems not

Re: List operations: Auto responders

2019-05-09 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 06:18:59PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > Am 26.04.19 um 21:23 schrieb Tim Düsterhus: > > I can confirm that the header is present now, thanks. > > As an update from my side: I can't remember receiving any more > out-of-office autoresponders after April, 26th,

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-09 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 02:31:58PM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > What a bad luck :D I must have compiled it just before you pushed that > change (segfault above is from haproxy 1.9.7-9b8ac0f). Great, so there's still some hope. I really appreciate your help and feedback here, such issues are

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-09 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 02:19:26PM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > Hi Willy, > > I've built 1.9 from head, unfortunately something is wrong, right now I've > got segfault: > > Core was generated by `/usr/sbin/haproxy -f /etc/haproxy/haproxy.cfg -p > /var/run/haproxy.pid -D -sf 75'. > Program

Re: haproxy-1.9 sanitizers finding

2019-05-09 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 01:04:36PM +0500, ??? wrote: > I would like to run sanitizers before new 1.9 release is out OK I've pushed 1.9-master with the last pending fixes. I guess it will break on libressl, but it passes the sanitize=address (except the one you already reported in

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-09 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Maciej, I've just pushed a number of fixes into 1.9-master, including the one I was talking about, if you want to try again. Cheers, Willy

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 04:48:55PM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > I'll gladly test Olivier patch after backporting. :) Thank you Maciej. I still have other stuff to deal with before going back to the pending 1.9 backports, and I'll merge it. Willy

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 03:03:23PM +0200, Olivier Houchard wrote: > > > I can't seem to remember :) > > > > Given the number of bugs we've dealt with in the last few weeks, you're > > forgiven :-) > > > > I'm afraid I'm getting old :/ Ah! you see how it feels! > > > I think that patch is safe

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 01:56:05PM +0200, Olivier Houchard wrote: > > > One of processes stuck in infinite loop, admin socket is not responsive so > > > I've got information only from gdb: > > > > > > 0x00484ab8 in h2_process_mux (h2c=0x2e8ff30) at src/mux_h2.c:2589 > > > 2589

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:06:31PM +0500, ??? wrote: > > Ilya, could you please instead change the test like this and test again : > > > > -#if defined(USE_OPENSSL) && (OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER >= 0x10101000L) > > +#if defined(USE_OPENSSL) && (OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER >= 0x1010100fL) > > > >

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 01:13:56PM +0500, ??? wrote: > > libressl ? My understanding of this thing is that this problem is not > > easy to detect by accident and causes a mess for people who reload often. > > If libressl is affected by this we probably need to find a different > > fix.

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:34:57AM +0500, ??? wrote: > From ad9961e92c692430272c9088a49759c889dac6f1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Ilya Shipitsin > Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 11:32:02 +0500 > Subject: [PATCH] BUILD: do not use "RAND_keep_random_devices_open" when > building

Re: [PATCH 1/1] BUILD: travis-ci bugfixes and improvements

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 01:42:43AM +0500, chipits...@gmail.com wrote: > From: Ilya Shipitsin > > Call missing scripts/build-ssl.sh (which actually builds SSL variants) > Enable OpenSSL, LibreSSL builds caching, it saves a bunch of time > LibreSSL builds are not allowed to fail anymore > Add

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:09:04AM +0500, ??? wrote: > ??, 8 ??? 2019 ?. ? 11:06, Willy Tarreau : > > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 10:59:20AM +0500, ??? wrote: > > > travis-ci supports windows builds. > > > > cool! > > > > my curren

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 10:59:20AM +0500, ??? wrote: > travis-ci supports windows builds. cool! > I will add such build a bit later (after > we settle with current travis-ci fixes) ...and this cygwin build issue :-) Willy

Re: haproxy 2.0 docker images

2019-05-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Aleks, On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 08:17:23AM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > > The outputs below raises some questions to me. > > > > * Should in the OPTIONS output also be the EXTRA_OBJS ? That's a good question. I was hesitating but given that the goal is to be able to easily rebuild a

Re: cygwin compilation error

2019-05-07 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi, On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 12:54:47PM +0300, Gil Bahat wrote: > Hi, > > is cygwin still supported anymore? Well, we never know :-) I mean, we're always open to fixes to make it work as long as they don't impact other platforms. > the target seems to be present in the > Makefiles and I'd love

Re: haproxy-1.9 sanitizers finding

2019-05-07 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 11:47:54AM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > when running regtests against 1.9 branch there are findings (not seen in > master branch) > > *** h10.0 > debug|= > *** h10.0

Re: systemd watchdog support?

2019-05-07 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi guys, On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 10:40:17PM +0200, William Lallemand wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 02:23:15PM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > > So with the prevalence of the issues lately where haproxy is going > > unresponsive and consuming 100% CPU, I wanted to see what

Re: [1.9 HEAD] HAProxy using 100% CPU

2019-05-07 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Maciej, On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 07:08:47PM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > Hi, > > I've got another bug with 100% CPU on HAProxy process, it is built from > HEAD of 1.9 branch. > > One of processes stuck in infinite loop, admin socket is not responsive so > I've got information only from gdb: >

Re: HAProxy 1.9.6 unresponsive

2019-05-07 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Patrick, On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 02:01:33PM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > Just in case it's useful, we had the issue recur today. However I gleaned a > little more information from this recurrence. Provided below are several > outputs from a gdb `bt full`. The important bit is that in the

Re: [PR] BUILD: extend travis-ci matrix

2019-05-06 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Lukas, On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:51:57PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > There is room for improvement here. Can you confirm that attaching a > patch file per commit to the email would fix this usability issue? I'd say yes, provided the attachments are prefixed with a sequence number, like

Re: HAProxy 1.9.6 unresponsive

2019-05-06 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 09:40:02AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > With this said, after studying the code a little bit more, I'm seeing a > potential case where if we'd have a trailers entry in the HTX buffer but > no end of message, we could loop forever there not consuming this block.

Re: reg-tests are broken when running osx + openssl

2019-05-06 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 12:54:06PM +0500, ??? wrote: > there's some random failure > > https://travis-ci.com/haproxy/haproxy/jobs/197824840 > > looks like test is not stable isn't it the same at the other one you reported that looked related to the latest SSL fixes ? Willy

Re: MEDIUM: Adding upstream socks4 proxy support

2019-05-06 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Alec, On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 07:59:16PM +0800, Alec Liu wrote: > > I'm seeing that you copied a doc retrieved from somewhere else that is > > found at various places on the net. Have you checked the license for > > this doc to be sure we can copy and distribute it like this ? It might > > be

Re: [1.9.7] One of haproxy processes using 100% CPU

2019-05-06 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Maciej, On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:49:26AM +0200, Maciej Zdeb wrote: > Hi, > > I confirm Willy patch fixed the problem! Thanks! Great, thanks for confirming! Willy

Re: reg-tests are broken when running osx + openssl

2019-05-06 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 10:11:38PM +0200, Frederic Lecaille wrote: > I had no access to any travis environment when it has been told in previous > mails that /tmp could not work, and /var/tmp could not either. > They were the first tested values. > > Now that I have setup a travis account, I have

Re: [PR] BUILD: extend travis-ci matrix

2019-05-06 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, > I made another PR > > https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/pull/92 Thank you. > (I really like automatic PR to mailing list routing) Well, it was the only workable workaround we have when people send PRs. Sadly we can't block them. Apparently only mirror repositories can block PRs

Re: [PATCH 1/2] CLEANUP: Remove appsession documentation

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 01:29:20AM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > - What about 'resolution_pool_size'? The only thing it does is emitting > a warning (not a fatal error). I believe it can also be removed from the > documentation. Apparently there is no single stable version with this directive, I

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-1.8.20

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 10:59:29PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > ? 5 mai 2019 09:51 +02, Vincent Bernat : > > >> So I'd suggest to insist on having the up to date version (even 1.8.21 if > >> we have a reason to have this one released by then). In the worst case, > >> if this is rejected for

Re: clang address sanitizer findings

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 08:49:10PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Bingo! Alignment was forced to 2^5 when using the sanitizer, which > causes it not only to detect issues, but may even cause some crashes > upon startup when trying to dereference padding as function pointers. > &g

Re: clang address sanitizer findings

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 11:36:46PM +0500, ??? wrote: > with sanitizer: > 27 init_STG_POOL 0800 00afb3a0 00afb3a0 006fa3a0 > 2**5 > CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, DATA > 28 init_STG_LOCK 02c0 00afbba0 00afbba0 006faba0 > 2**5 >

Re: clang address sanitizer findings

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:04:22PM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > I run fedora 30, it includes clang-8, I built haproxy using > > make CC=clang V=1 TARGET=$TARGET $FLAGS DEBUG_CFLAGS="-fsanitize=address > -ggdb" LDFLAGS="-fsanitize=address" > > when running reg-tests, the following is

Re: [PR] BUILD: extend travis-ci matrix

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 02:26:11PM +0500, ??? wrote: > can we also apply patch from > https://www.mail-archive.com/haproxy@formilux.org/msg33439.html ? > it should repair libressl builds Ah indeed I remember having noticed this one and postponed it because it needed to be edited to have

Re: haproxy 1.9.7 http mode error

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Mikhail, On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 03:41:32PM +0300, Mikhail Golub wrote: > Hi. > > After upgrade haproxy to version 1.9.7 from FreeBSD port i give error ... in > reverse proxy for MS Exchange. > ActiveSync, OWA - works. > MAPI stop working >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-1.8.20

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 09:51:11AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > ? 5 mai 2019 09:14 +02, Willy Tarreau : > > > So I'd suggest to insist on having the up to date version (even 1.8.21 if > > we have a reason to have this one released by then). In the worst case, >

Re: [PR] BUILD: extend travis-ci matrix

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 10:23:05AM +, PR Bot wrote: > Description: >added openssl-1.0.2, 1.1.0, 1.1.1, libressl-2.7.5, 2.8.3, 2.9.1 >added linux-ppc64le image Applied, thanks Ilya, Willy

Re: findings of gcc address sanitizer

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ilya, On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 06:58:19PM +0500, ??? wrote: > *** h10.1 debug|#0 0x6db986 in update_log_hdr src/log.c:1399 (...) > *** h10.1 debug|previously allocated by thread T0 here: > *** h10.1 debug|#0 0x7f8ebd15c5de in realloc >

Re: reg-tests are broken when running osx + openssl

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 07:27:48PM +0200, Frederic Lecaille wrote: > - - env VTEST_PROGRAM=../vtest/vtest make reg-tests > + - env TMPDIR=~/tmp VTEST_PROGRAM=../vtest/vtest make reg-tests That may sound like a stupid question, but what makes you think that ~/tmp will actually result in a

Re: HAProxy 1.9.6 unresponsive

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Patrick, On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 04:33:07PM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > We are running HAProxy 1.9.6 and managed to get into a state where HAProxy > was completely unresponsive. It was pegged at 100% like many of the other > experiences here on the mailing list lately. But in addition it

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-1.8.20

2019-05-05 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Vincent! On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 01:57:06PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > ? 29 avril 2019 11:04 +02, Christopher Faulet : > > > HAProxy 1.8.20 was released on 2019/04/25. It added 48 new commits > > after version 1.8.19. > > Hey! > > Debian Buster will soon be released (nobody knows

Re: v1.9.6 socket unresponsive with high cpu usage

2019-05-04 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 07:07:21AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Thus I conclude that it crashed, and that all other threads just met at > the same lock while the core was being dumped in this one. Or maybe the tree got corrupted and __eb_insert_dup() entered an endless loop. If that's th

Re: v1.9.6 socket unresponsive with high cpu usage

2019-05-04 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi William, On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 09:33:29AM +, William Dauchy wrote: > > Note that with all the scheduling issues we've fixed over the last > > days, there are multiple candidates which could cause this. Another > > one was the lack of effect of the nice parameter which is normally > > set

Re: High CPU with Haproxy 1.9.4 (and 1.9.2)

2019-05-01 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Mark, On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 12:21:25PM +0200, Mark Janssen wrote: > Looks like it's running with a high cpu-level again it's currently not > impacting the site performance it seems, so I'll leave it running for a bit > if that might help trace where the problem might be. > > thread_id:

Re: DoS in h2 - from f5.com

2019-05-01 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Joao, On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 09:10:22PM -0300, Joao Morais wrote: > Hi list, do you know if HAProxy wasn't mentioned here[1] because it isn't > vulnerable (1.8 and 1.9) or because it wasn't tested? I think it's both :-) Some people at F5 know haproxy's internal architecture quite well and

Re: reg-tests fail on FreeBSD 12.0

2019-04-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:43:31AM +0200, Frederic Lecaille wrote: > On 4/30/19 11:24 AM, ??? wrote: > > you are right. > > > > let us exclude that particular test from freebsd (what your patch > > exactly does) > > Ok Thank you Ilya. > > Willy could you merge this patch if we decide

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >