On 05/10/2020 23:18, John Fawcett wrote:
> On 05/10/2020 22:19, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Benny Pedersen:
>>> Oct 5 17:01:09 localhost kernel: postscreen[387]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f78d9773cea sp 00007ffeb1cb0960 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f78d9759000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:09:51 localhost kernel: postscreen[1310]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f372355dcea sp 00007fff7569b520 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f3723543000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:18:20 localhost kernel: postscreen[11822]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f4a3e9bfcea sp 00007ffea70b09c0 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f4a3e9a5000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:19:57 localhost kernel: postscreen[20595]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007fe15ba10cea sp 00007ffc68250090 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7fe15b9f6000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:21:38 localhost kernel: postscreen[11930]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007fdf1de1fcea sp 00007ffffdfc02c0 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7fdf1de05000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:22:14 localhost kernel: postscreen[16126]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f69bc4ddcea sp 00007ffeab170220 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f69bc4c3000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:22:20 localhost kernel: postscreen[16138]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f7c9db76cea sp 00007ffc3e818b70 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f7c9db5c000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:27:18 localhost kernel: postscreen[22685]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f027d5a8cea sp 00007ffc70a1b5f0 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f027d58e000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:28:36 localhost kernel: postscreen[22746]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007fd00d9f2cea sp 00007fffb5133e70 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7fd00d9d8000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:28:36 localhost kernel: postscreen[22752]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f15ed50ecea sp 00007fff054e0ea0 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f15ed4f4000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:29:10 localhost kernel: postscreen[22764]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007fbcf74becea sp 00007ffc1c2a6840 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7fbcf74a4000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:29:16 localhost kernel: postscreen[22767]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f2c802b1cea sp 00007ffd9c3d28f0 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f2c80297000+29000]
>>> Oct 5 17:30:02 localhost kernel: postscreen[22771]: segfault at 0 ip
>>> 00007f388bc98cea sp 00007ffc372ca850 error 4 in
>>> libpostfix-util.so[7f388bc7e000+29000]
>>>
>>> both with postfix 3.5.6 and 3.5.7 on gentoo
>>>
>>> removed:
>>>
>>> postscreen_dnsbl_reply_map =
>>> texthash:/etc/postfix/postscreen_dnsbl_reply_map
>>> postscreen_dnsbl_sites = APIKEY.combined.mail.abusix.zone
>>>
>>> that removed the seqfaults
>>>
>>> kernel is 5.4.66, dont know if thats related to my problem, is other
>>> seen that problem ?
>> Support for postscreen_dnsbl_* not changed in years. You can try
>> to attack a debugger as in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html,
>> to find out what function(s) are active at the time.
>>
>> Wietse
> Hi
>
> maybe just a wild guess... but looking at the code in dict_thash.c is
> this guaranteed to return something not null?
>
> dict = dict_open3(DICT_TYPE_HT, path, open_flags, dict_flags);
>
> If it ever returns null, it would likely produce a segfault later on.
>
> John
>
Actually to be more precise: is it guaranteed to return not null and
with all the function pointers in the returned dict struct also not
null. I'm adding this because I think it does always return something
not null, but I'm not sure that the function pointers are always not
null. There's a condition that sometimes does not define update and
delete in dict_surrogate.c
if (open_flags & O_RDWR) {
dp->dict.update = dict_surrogate_update;
dp->dict.delete = dict_surrogate_delete;
}
Not sure if that helps, but just an idea.
John
John
