[Bug 66557] New: Faulting application name: tomcat9.exe, version: 1.3.3.0, time stamp: 0x637e7ca5
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66557 Bug ID: 66557 Summary: Faulting application name: tomcat9.exe, version: 1.3.3.0, time stamp: 0x637e7ca5 Product: Tomcat 9 Version: 9.0.73 Hardware: PC Status: NEW Severity: critical Priority: P2 Component: Packaging Assignee: dev@tomcat.apache.org Reporter: denish.kothad...@dell.com Target Milestone: - Tomcat9.exe crash in windows server 2016 and 2019 while updating service. We have seen similar issue with Tomcat 9 version 9.0.70 and above. Environment details: OS: Windows server 2016 and 2019 Disk space: More than 80 GB RAM: 8GB and more Tomcat service details: JvmMs=521 JvmMx=3076 After creating tomcat service, We run below command to update service with JavaOption9 Tomcat9 //US//Tomcat9 ++JvmOptions9 --add-opens=java.base/java.lang.reflect=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/jdk.internal.reflect=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.lang.annotation=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.util.Date=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.io=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.util.concurrent=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.util.concurrent.atomic=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.math=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/java.text=ALL-UNNAMED#--add-opens=java.base/javax.net.ssl=ALL-UNNAMED Above command fails with below crash in EventViewer: Faulting application name: tomcat9.exe, version: 1.3.3.0, time stamp: 0x637e7ca5 Faulting module name: ntdll.dll, version: 10.0.17763.2237, time stamp: 0x65420ea4 Exception code: 0xc374 Fault offset: 0x000fa979 Faulting process id: 0x298 Faulting application start time: 0x01d967f65ac00dce Faulting application path: C:\Program Files\DELL\WMS\Tomcat-9\bin\tomcat9.exe Faulting module path: C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll Report Id: 28b620b5-f3a0-40c3-99ae-962cab71bab8 Faulting package full name: Please let me know if you need any more details. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[Bug 66556] Addind RemoteIpValve redirects the requests to http port instead of expected https.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66556 Christopher Schultz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Comment #1 from Christopher Schultz --- Please attach your configuration with any secrets removed. I suspect that the is not marked with scheme="https" or some related configuration setting. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[Bug 66556] New: Addind RemoteIpValve redirects the requests to http port instead of expected https.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66556 Bug ID: 66556 Summary: Addind RemoteIpValve redirects the requests to http port instead of expected https. Product: Tomcat 8 Version: 8.5.86 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina Assignee: dev@tomcat.apache.org Reporter: son...@vmware.com Target Milestone: As per the STIG requirement we added the remoteIpValve for logging the clientIp in logs, after adding remoteIpValve requests are redirects to a URL using the http protocol instead of the expected https protocol. For all requests we are getting 302 http status. Below code we added : Please let us know if any further modifications needs to be done while configuring the tomcat. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: BZ 66508 and tagging progress update
On 05/04/2023 17:46, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 5:32 PM Mark Thomas wrote: On 05/04/2023 13:01, Mark Thomas wrote: Good news and bad news. The good news is that the issues were with the test. The test has to use statics to pass data to Endpoint instances and they weren't being reset properly between tests. With that fixed there were 2 failures that are both fixed by the proposed patch. The bad news is that the proposed patch fixes one possible cause of the deadlock but introduces another. I'm working on an updated patch. I have a fix but... The proposed patch for BZ 66508 (both the original and the updated patch) depend on the change from synchronizing on socketWrapper to using a ReentrantLock. This change was made to 10.1.x onwards to support Loom experiments but was not back-ported to 9.0.x and earlier. https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/0a9480158874ea910a4d629d24f31d69d6cc5f96 What do folks think about back-porting this change to 9.0.x and 8.5.x? Time to backport it then. Thanks for the review. After I wrote the above email I started to think about ways of back-porting the fix that didn't require the synchronized -> ReeentrantLock change. If we need to back-port that change so be it, but if I can find a way to back-port the original fix and keep synchronized that isn't any more of an ugly hack than the original fix then I think I'll go that route as I don't want to change existing API (even internal API) unless I have to. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: BZ 66508 and tagging progress update
On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 5:32 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 05/04/2023 13:01, Mark Thomas wrote: > > Good news and bad news. > > > > The good news is that the issues were with the test. The test has to use > > statics to pass data to Endpoint instances and they weren't being reset > > properly between tests. With that fixed there were 2 failures that are > > both fixed by the proposed patch. > > > > The bad news is that the proposed patch fixes one possible cause of the > > deadlock but introduces another. > > > > I'm working on an updated patch. > > I have a fix but... > > The proposed patch for BZ 66508 (both the original and the updated > patch) depend on the change from synchronizing on socketWrapper to using > a ReentrantLock. This change was made to 10.1.x onwards to support Loom > experiments but was not back-ported to 9.0.x and earlier. > > https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/0a9480158874ea910a4d629d24f31d69d6cc5f96 > > What do folks think about back-porting this change to 9.0.x and 8.5.x? Time to backport it then. Rémy > Mark > > > > > Mark > > > > > > On 04/04/2023 20:23, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I now have a test case for BZ 66508. Having parameterized it for > >> NIO/NIO2, useAsyncIO = true/false and sending messages from the server > >> on a container thread or not I think I am making progress. > >> > >> Without the patch 6 out of 8 tests fail. > >> > >> With the patch 3 out of 8 tests fail. > >> > >> I'm not sure if the problem lies with the new test or with Tomcat at > >> this point. > >> > >> At this point tomorrow is my most optimistic estimate of when I'll be > >> able to tag 11.0.x. > >> > >> Mark > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > >> > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: BZ 66508 and tagging progress update
On 05/04/2023 13:01, Mark Thomas wrote: Good news and bad news. The good news is that the issues were with the test. The test has to use statics to pass data to Endpoint instances and they weren't being reset properly between tests. With that fixed there were 2 failures that are both fixed by the proposed patch. The bad news is that the proposed patch fixes one possible cause of the deadlock but introduces another. I'm working on an updated patch. I have a fix but... The proposed patch for BZ 66508 (both the original and the updated patch) depend on the change from synchronizing on socketWrapper to using a ReentrantLock. This change was made to 10.1.x onwards to support Loom experiments but was not back-ported to 9.0.x and earlier. https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/0a9480158874ea910a4d629d24f31d69d6cc5f96 What do folks think about back-porting this change to 9.0.x and 8.5.x? Mark Mark On 04/04/2023 20:23, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, I now have a test case for BZ 66508. Having parameterized it for NIO/NIO2, useAsyncIO = true/false and sending messages from the server on a container thread or not I think I am making progress. Without the patch 6 out of 8 tests fail. With the patch 3 out of 8 tests fail. I'm not sure if the problem lies with the new test or with Tomcat at this point. At this point tomorrow is my most optimistic estimate of when I'll be able to tag 11.0.x. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[tomcat] branch 10.1.x updated: Fix comment
This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
markt pushed a commit to branch 10.1.x
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat.git
The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/10.1.x by this push:
new a03832d071 Fix comment
a03832d071 is described below
commit a03832d071d8dfd4e893836c4cce04c2351c9c54
Author: Mark Thomas
AuthorDate: Wed Apr 5 16:09:03 2023 +0100
Fix comment
---
java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
b/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
index 138da2e7b1..ab11ce9977 100644
--- a/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
+++ b/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ public abstract class SocketProcessorBase implements
Runnable {
lock.lock();
try {
// It is possible that processing may be triggered for read and
-// write at the same time. The sync above makes sure that
processing
+// write at the same time. The lock above makes sure that
processing
// does not occur in parallel. The test below ensures that if the
// first event to be processed results in the socket being closed,
// the subsequent events are not processed.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[tomcat] branch main updated: Fix comment
This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
markt pushed a commit to branch main
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat.git
The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/main by this push:
new 0eb4b7344f Fix comment
0eb4b7344f is described below
commit 0eb4b7344fe1bc91910b740139f553490a85f60d
Author: Mark Thomas
AuthorDate: Wed Apr 5 16:09:03 2023 +0100
Fix comment
---
java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
b/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
index 138da2e7b1..ab11ce9977 100644
--- a/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
+++ b/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/SocketProcessorBase.java
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ public abstract class SocketProcessorBase implements
Runnable {
lock.lock();
try {
// It is possible that processing may be triggered for read and
-// write at the same time. The sync above makes sure that
processing
+// write at the same time. The lock above makes sure that
processing
// does not occur in parallel. The test below ensures that if the
// first event to be processed results in the socket being closed,
// the subsequent events are not processed.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[Bug 66554] tomcat shutdown error in log
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554 Remy Maucherat changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|NEW --- Comment #3 from Remy Maucherat --- (In reply to SESAME from comment #2) > Created attachment 38531 [details] > server.xml Thanks. So after reviewing it, the issue is caused by the fact that the session id generator is always created during start in the webapp classloader context (other platforms won't see any issue since they would simply use the system seed, it seems yours would not and creates that seed thread). While it would be possible to make the context switch more precise, it is mostly a waste of time IMO. The most reasonable option would be to init this ahead of time. Maybe something like getting some bytes from a Random in StandardServer.initInternal, or something like that, would be the best plan. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: BZ 66508 and tagging progress update
Good news and bad news. The good news is that the issues were with the test. The test has to use statics to pass data to Endpoint instances and they weren't being reset properly between tests. With that fixed there were 2 failures that are both fixed by the proposed patch. The bad news is that the proposed patch fixes one possible cause of the deadlock but introduces another. I'm working on an updated patch. Mark On 04/04/2023 20:23, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, I now have a test case for BZ 66508. Having parameterized it for NIO/NIO2, useAsyncIO = true/false and sending messages from the server on a container thread or not I think I am making progress. Without the patch 6 out of 8 tests fail. With the patch 3 out of 8 tests fail. I'm not sure if the problem lies with the new test or with Tomcat at this point. At this point tomorrow is my most optimistic estimate of when I'll be able to tag 11.0.x. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[Bug 66554] tomcat shutdown error in log
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554 --- Comment #2 from SESAME --- Created attachment 38531 --> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38531=edit server.xml -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[Bug 66554] tomcat shutdown error in log
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554 Remy Maucherat changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO --- Comment #1 from Remy Maucherat --- It's mostly a warning (which can be disabled). This thread was apparently started while the context CL was set to the app's, and so that causes a leak if you reload the said app. This can happen if somehow the random has not been used before going into the app and it uses it first, and if the internal seed provider is being used. I don't quite understand how that can happen since the default manager will initialize and use the session id generator on start. The thread should be started at that point. Please provide the Tomcat configuration used (server.xml). "I think on windows or linux there would be the same error" Actually, it would be far more likely to rely on OS provided features in that case (you can read the JDK sources), so no I don't think the issue will occur. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
[Bug 66554] New: tomcat shutdown error in log
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66554 Bug ID: 66554 Summary: tomcat shutdown error in log Product: Tomcat 9 Version: 9.0.73 Hardware: Other OS: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina Assignee: dev@tomcat.apache.org Reporter: t...@sesame-informatique.fr Target Milestone: - Good morning, ibm i platform, but I think on windows or linux there would be the same error. I only encounter the problem on one application and not the others, when tomcat stops an error is written in the log, I do not encounter any problem with tomcat 9.10 error : 04-Apr-2023 14:27:08.822 AVERTISSEMENT [http-nio-81-exec-7] org.apache.catalina.loader.WebappClassLoaderBase.clearReferencesThreads L'application web [planning] semble avoir démarré un thread nommé [SeedGenerator Thread] mais ne l'a pas arrêté, ce qui va probablement créer une fuite de mémoire ; la trace du thread est : java.base/java.lang.Object.wait(Native Method) java.base/java.lang.Object.wait(Object.java:190) java.base/sun.security.provider.SeedGenerator$ThreadedSeedGenerator.run(SeedGenerator.java:332) java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:839) Cordially. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
