Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[fix](brpc) coredump caused by brpc checking #44047

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mrhhsg
Copy link
Member

@mrhhsg mrhhsg commented Nov 15, 2024

What problem does this PR solve?

/root/doris/be/src/runtime/fragment_mgr.cpp:1064:20: runtime error: member call on null pointer of type 'doris::PBackendService_Stub'
#0 0x55bd899c9aaa in doris::FragmentMgr::_check_brpc_available(std::shared_ptr<doris::PBackendService_Stub> const&, doris::FragmentMgr::BrpcItem const&) /root/doris/be/src/runtime/fragment_mgr.cpp:1064:20
#1 0x55bd899c521f in doris::FragmentMgr::cancel_worker() /root/doris/be/src/runtime/fragment_mgr.cpp:1021:13
#2 0x55bd8a4c97ae in std::function<void ()>::operator()() const /var/local/ldb-toolchain/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/11/../../../../include/c++/11/bits/std_function.h:560:9
#3 0x55bd8a4c97ae in doris::Thread::supervise_thread(void*) /root/doris/be/src/util/thread.cpp:498:5
#4 0x7f7601092608 in start_thread /build/glibc-SzIz7B/glibc-2.31/nptl/pthread_create.c:477:8
#5 0x7f760133f132 in __clone /build/glibc-SzIz7B/glibc-2.31/misc/../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:95
   
SUMMARY: UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer: undefined-behavior /root/doris/be/src/runtime/fragment_mgr.cpp:1064:20 in
*** Query id: 0-0 ***
*** is nereids: 0 ***
*** tablet id: 0 ***
*** Aborted at 1731663847 (unix time) try "date -d @1731663847" if you are using GNU date ***
*** Current BE git commitID: b663df0e50 ***
*** SIGSEGV address not mapped to object (@0x0) received by PID 17169 (TID 17463 OR 0x7f746d21a700) from PID 0; stack trace: ***
0# doris::signal::(anonymous namespace)::FailureSignalHandler(int, siginfo_t*, void*) at /root/doris/be/src/common/signal_handler.h:421
1# PosixSignals::chained_handler(int, siginfo_t*, void*) [clone .part.0] in /usr/lib/jvm/java-17-openjdk-amd64/lib/server/libjvm.so
2# JVM_handle_linux_signal in /usr/lib/jvm/java-17-openjdk-amd64/lib/server/libjvm.so
3# 0x00007F7601263090 in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
4# doris::FragmentMgr::_check_brpc_available(std::shared_ptr<doris::PBackendService_Stub> const&, doris::FragmentMgr::BrpcItem const&) in /mnt/ssd01/pipline/OpenSourceDoris/clusterEnv/P0/Cluster0/be/lib/doris_be
5# doris::FragmentMgr::cancel_worker() at /root/doris/be/src/runtime/fragment_mgr.cpp:1022
6# doris::Thread::supervise_thread(void*) at /root/doris/be/src/util/thread.cpp:499
7# start_thread at /build/glibc-SzIz7B/glibc-2.31/nptl/pthread_create.c:478
8# __clone at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:97

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

  • Test

    • Regression test
    • Unit Test
    • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
      • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
      • Previous test can cover this change.
      • No code files have been changed.
      • Other reason
  • Behavior changed:

    • No.
    • Yes.
  • Does this need documentation?

    • No.
    • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

  • Confirm the release note
  • Confirm test cases
  • Confirm document
  • Add branch pick label

@doris-robot
Copy link

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@mrhhsg
Copy link
Member Author

mrhhsg commented Nov 15, 2024

run buildall

Copy link
Contributor

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍"

@github-actions github-actions bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label Nov 15, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

Copy link
Contributor

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

@doris-robot
Copy link

TeamCity be ut coverage result:
Function Coverage: 38.00% (9902/26057)
Line Coverage: 29.17% (82708/283521)
Region Coverage: 28.31% (42496/150100)
Branch Coverage: 24.88% (21543/86588)
Coverage Report: http://coverage.selectdb-in.cc/coverage/7dfed67f3fe9b539e3e1c3d4c641a2c9957bf57d_7dfed67f3fe9b539e3e1c3d4c641a2c9957bf57d/report/index.html

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. reviewed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants