2.0-dev5-ea8dd94 - conn_fd_handler() - dumps core - Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.

Hi Olivier, It seems this commit ea8dd94  broke something for my FreeBSD11 system. Before that commit (almost) all vtest's succeed. After it several cause core-dumps. (and keep doing that including the current HEAD: 03abf2d ) Can you take a look at the issue? Below in this mail are the follo

RE: cygwin compilation error

>On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 09:46:04PM +, Zakharychev, Bob wrote: >> I mean it returns 0. What happens is that as soon as the other side >> (haproxy) terminates, poll() starts returning immediately with >> positive return value and POLLIN being the only flag set in >> fd->revents as if there's

Re: [BUG] memory leak with treads and stick-table/peers

> Le 5 juin 2019 à 16:07, Emmanuel Hocdet a écrit : > > Hi Frederic > >> Le 5 juin 2019 à 15:44, Frederic Lecaille > > a écrit : >> >> On 6/5/19 3:06 PM, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: >>> Hi, >> >> Hi Emmanuel, >> >>> After switched to haproxy 1.9 with threads activate

Re: [BUG] memory leak with treads and stick-table/peers

Hi Frederic > Le 5 juin 2019 à 15:44, Frederic Lecaille a écrit : > > On 6/5/19 3:06 PM, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: >> Hi, > > Hi Emmanuel, > >> After switched to haproxy 1.9 with threads activated, i noticed a >> significant memory leak. > > Is valgrind able to expose this memory leak? > >> Wi

Re: [BUG] memory leak with treads and stick-table/peers

On 6/5/19 3:06 PM, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: Hi, Hi Emmanuel, After switched to haproxy 1.9 with threads activated, i noticed a significant memory leak. Is valgrind able to expose this memory leak? With threads disable (and bind process omitted) leak disappear. This seems to be related to

[BUG] memory leak with treads and stick-table/peers

Hi, After switched to haproxy 1.9 with threads activated, i noticed a significant memory leak. With threads disable (and bind process omitted) leak disappear. This seems to be related to stick-table/peers with regard to the (simplified) configuration. ++ Manu ENV: HA-Proxy version 1.9.8-1 2

Re: Discussion about "Upstream socks proxy support #82"

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 3:49 AM Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > nutinshell have another use case which is a `socks4-redirect` > https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/issues/82#issuecomment-498007739 Is there such a specification for `socks4-redirect`? (I've looked in the original SOCKS4 specification and

Re: cygwin compilation error

Bob, we have added very basic cygwin CI https://travis-ci.com/haproxy/haproxy/jobs/205561046 it is "build only". feel free to improve it :) ср, 5 июн. 2019 г. в 02:49, Zakharychev, Bob : > Willy, > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 05:52:12PM +, Zakharychev, Bob wrote: > >> Finally got VTest compi

Re: cygwin compilation error

On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 09:46:04PM +, Zakharychev, Bob wrote: > I mean it returns 0. What happens is that as soon as the other side (haproxy) > terminates, poll() starts returning immediately with positive return value > and POLLIN being the only flag set in fd->revents as if there's something

Re: [PATCH] improve travis-ci builds

On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 02:21:48AM +0500, ??? wrote: > update LibreSSL to 2.9.2 > speed up build by using "make -j3" > cache BoringSSL checkout > build prometeus exporter > add basic cygwin build > add USE_TFO=1, USE_SYSTEMD=1 to linux builds Merged, thanks Ilya! W

Re: [PATCH] MINOR: SSL: add client/server random sample fetches

On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 07:56:21PM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > The updated patch fixes the documentation to be in alphabetical order. Got > carried away with putting the doc in the same order the code is in. Now merged, thank you Patrick! willy

Re: [PATCH] CLEANUP: ssl: remove unneeded defined(OPENSSL_IS_BORINGSSL)

On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:55:17PM +0500, ??? wrote: > something went wrong ? > > I do not see this commit Bah I should stop merging patches late at night, it turns out it's not the first time I forget to push and they rot on my other machine :-( Thanks for notifying me, Willy

Re: SD-termination cause

Hi Maksim, On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 07:55:09AM +0300, ?? ? wrote: > Sorry for bothering you, but do you have any news about this case? I just wanted to send you a quick update on this to let you know that it's not forgotten, it is that while taking a look at the connection setup parts,

Re: [PATCH] CLEANUP: ssl: remove unneeded defined(OPENSSL_IS_BORINGSSL)

something went wrong ? I do not see this commit ср, 5 июн. 2019 г. в 01:35, Willy Tarreau : > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 05:04:03PM +0200, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Simple cleanup to limit #defined inflation. > > Merged, thanks Manu. > > Willy > >