Re: [oi-dev] [developer] [Samba] gencache.tdb: device busy
Well, the only thing I got was that there is the return code EBUSY on all mutexes, when I run unpatched and the issue only exists on illumos not linux. Using debuggers etc i did not succeed due to my lacking knowledge. > Am 21.04.2019 um 14:28 schrieb Richard Lowe : > > You could check whether the mutex already looks initialized to us using a > debugger or logging statements added to the code. > > If that's the case, we can think again about relaxing the check I added in > 9959. > > > >> On Sun, Apr 21, 2019, 08:20 Rouven WEILER wrote: >> Any chance to get to know what happens? >> >>> Am 21.04.2019 um 14:12 schrieb Richard Lowe : >>> >>> It's possible there's a bug. It's also possible you're getting really >>> unlucky and the uninitialized mutex looks valid because the magic is valid. >>> On Sun, Apr 21, 2019, 06:10 Rouven WEILER wrote: Dear all, trying to make samba work and getting rid of my error message [2019/04/01 09:51:41.112485, 0] ../../lib/tdb_wrap/tdb_wrap.c:64(tdb_wrap_log) tdb(/var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb): tdb_open_ex: tdb_mutex_init failed for /var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb: Device busy I followed the info of Youzhong. It definitely works. So thankx. BUT: The OS (OpenIndiana; state of April,19th) is patched against the illumos issue 9959 So there might be some mechanism (maybe MUTEX_MAGIC) that avoids the initialization of the mutex before init. I am really not deep in all that pthread stuff… Is there the possiblity that there is a bug in the code base of issue 9959? Best regards Rouven > Am 18.04.2019 um 19:20 schrieb Robert Mustacchi : > > On 4/18/19 10:12 , Youzhong Yang wrote: >> Little bit confused. The page https://www.openindiana.org/download/ >> shows >> latest ISO is dated 2018.10, but 9959 fix was submitted on 11/26/2018, I >> guess Hipster doesn't have it. > > The ISO is just the install image. Generally, after using that to > bootstrap, then folks will update to latest bits via IPS. As a result, > the ISO isn't updated (and generally doesn't have to be) quite as often. > > Robert > >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:38 PM Rouven WEILER >> wrote: >> >>> On my system the issue is solved and the sources are patched >>> accordingly. >>> Thus, the issue seems to be somewhere else. >>> >>> Am 18.04.2019 um 18:27 schrieb Rouven WEILER : >>> >>> concerning openindiana I am using the most recent one. I right now asked >>> if the issue is solved in the latest version. >>> >>> another interesting thing is that older samba versions do not throw >>> EBUSY, >>> although on the same underlying system. >>> >>> >>> >>> Am 18.04.2019 um 18:07 schrieb Youzhong Yang : >>> >>> That is interesting. I am curious about how pthread_mutexattr_init ends >>> up >>> returning EBUSY. What verison of Openindiana are you running? is there a >>> link pointing to the fix that it has for 9959? >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Rouven WEILER >>> wrote: >>> I understand and see that it works, but as written below pthread_mutexattr_init throws EBUSY, not pthread_mutex_init. Also Openindiana seems to include the patch for issue 9959 mentioned. I will clarify that to make sure. I just want to make sure that the patch you suggest aims for the issue and is not a workaround. Am 18.04.2019 um 16:09 schrieb Youzhong Yang : I reproduced the issue on a smartos version which does not have the fix for https://www.illumos.org/issues/9959. The pthread_mutex_init() at line 590 returns EBUSY: ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, ); https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=blob;f=lib/tdb/common/mutex.c;h=8a122d5d6a2ec321bce25cf06062acc808f1e126;hb=HEAD#l590 Then I applied the following patch to lib/tdb/common/mutex.c: # git grep -B 1 -n pthread_mutex_init lib/tdb/common/mutex.c lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-590- bzero(chain, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:591: ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, ); -- lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-599- bzero(>allrecord_mutex, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:600: ret = pthread_mutex_init(>allrecord_mutex, ); -- lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-693- bzero(, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:694: ret = pthread_mutex_init(, ); -- lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-891- bzero(ptr, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:892: ret =
Re: [oi-dev] [developer] [Samba] gencache.tdb: device busy
You could check whether the mutex already looks initialized to us using a debugger or logging statements added to the code. If that's the case, we can think again about relaxing the check I added in 9959. On Sun, Apr 21, 2019, 08:20 Rouven WEILER wrote: > Any chance to get to know what happens? > > Am 21.04.2019 um 14:12 schrieb Richard Lowe : > > It's possible there's a bug. It's also possible you're getting really > unlucky and the uninitialized mutex looks valid because the magic is valid. > > On Sun, Apr 21, 2019, 06:10 Rouven WEILER wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> trying to make samba work and getting rid of my error message >> >> [2019/04/01 09:51:41.112485, 0] >> ../../lib/tdb_wrap/tdb_wrap.c:64(tdb_wrap_log) >> tdb(/var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb): tdb_open_ex: tdb_mutex_init failed for >> /var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb: Device busy >> >> >> I followed the info of Youzhong. It definitely works. So thankx. >> BUT: The OS (OpenIndiana; state of April,19th) is patched against the >> illumos issue 9959 >> >> So there might be some mechanism (maybe MUTEX_MAGIC) that avoids the >> initialization of the mutex before init. >> I am really not deep in all that pthread stuff… >> >> Is there the possiblity that there is a bug in the code base of issue >> 9959? >> >> >> Best regards >> >> Rouven >> >> >> Am 18.04.2019 um 19:20 schrieb Robert Mustacchi : >> >> On 4/18/19 10:12 , Youzhong Yang wrote: >> >> Little bit confused. The page https://www.openindiana.org/download/ >> shows >> latest ISO is dated 2018.10, but 9959 fix was submitted on 11/26/2018, I >> guess Hipster doesn't have it. >> >> >> The ISO is just the install image. Generally, after using that to >> bootstrap, then folks will update to latest bits via IPS. As a result, >> the ISO isn't updated (and generally doesn't have to be) quite as often. >> >> Robert >> >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:38 PM Rouven WEILER >> wrote: >> >> On my system the issue is solved and the sources are patched accordingly. >> Thus, the issue seems to be somewhere else. >> >> Am 18.04.2019 um 18:27 schrieb Rouven WEILER : >> >> concerning openindiana I am using the most recent one. I right now asked >> if the issue is solved in the latest version. >> >> another interesting thing is that older samba versions do not throw EBUSY, >> although on the same underlying system. >> >> >> >> Am 18.04.2019 um 18:07 schrieb Youzhong Yang : >> >> That is interesting. I am curious about how pthread_mutexattr_init ends up >> returning EBUSY. What verison of Openindiana are you running? is there a >> link pointing to the fix that it has for 9959? >> >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Rouven WEILER >> wrote: >> >> I understand and see that it works, but as written below >> pthread_mutexattr_init throws EBUSY, not pthread_mutex_init. >> >> Also Openindiana seems to include the patch for issue 9959 mentioned. I >> will clarify that to make sure. >> >> I just want to make sure that the patch you suggest aims for the issue >> and is not a workaround. >> >> >> Am 18.04.2019 um 16:09 schrieb Youzhong Yang : >> >> I reproduced the issue on a smartos version which does not have the fix >> for https://www.illumos.org/issues/9959. >> >> The pthread_mutex_init() at line 590 returns EBUSY: >> ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, ); >> >> >> https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=blob;f=lib/tdb/common/mutex.c;h=8a122d5d6a2ec321bce25cf06062acc808f1e126;hb=HEAD#l590 >> >> >> Then I applied the following patch to lib/tdb/common/mutex.c: >> >> # git grep -B 1 -n pthread_mutex_init lib/tdb/common/mutex.c >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-590- bzero(chain, >> sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:591: ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, >> ); >> -- >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-599- bzero(>allrecord_mutex, >> sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:600: ret = >> pthread_mutex_init(>allrecord_mutex, ); >> -- >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-693- bzero(, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:694: ret = pthread_mutex_init(, ); >> -- >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-891- bzero(ptr, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:892: ret = pthread_mutex_init(ptr, ); >> >> It works like a charm. Fair enough? >> >> So again I recommend either of the following two: >> - apply 9959 fix to your OS image, or use a newer version which has 9959 >> fix >> - bzero pthread_mutex_t struct before calling pthread_mutex_init(). >> >> In my environment I applied bzero patch to all pthread_mutex_init() calls >> in the entire samba code base, you know, who knows what is going to >> happen. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 4:29 AM Rouven WEILER >> wrote: >> >> That sounds reasonable! >> Could you help me to dtrace that in a feasible way? Up to now I am not >> used to dtrace. Except knowing what is and that its powerful. >> >> Am 18.04.2019 um 09:29 schrieb Jason King : >> >> It appears that the robust mutexes are mmapped from the .tdb file. >> EBUSY means that the
Re: [oi-dev] [developer] [Samba] gencache.tdb: device busy
Any chance to get to know what happens? > Am 21.04.2019 um 14:12 schrieb Richard Lowe : > > It's possible there's a bug. It's also possible you're getting really > unlucky and the uninitialized mutex looks valid because the magic is valid. > >> On Sun, Apr 21, 2019, 06:10 Rouven WEILER wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> trying to make samba work and getting rid of my error message >> [2019/04/01 09:51:41.112485, 0] >> ../../lib/tdb_wrap/tdb_wrap.c:64(tdb_wrap_log) >> tdb(/var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb): tdb_open_ex: tdb_mutex_init failed for >> /var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb: Device busy >> >> I followed the info of Youzhong. It definitely works. So thankx. >> BUT: The OS (OpenIndiana; state of April,19th) is patched against the >> illumos issue 9959 >> >> So there might be some mechanism (maybe MUTEX_MAGIC) that avoids the >> initialization of the mutex before init. >> I am really not deep in all that pthread stuff… >> >> Is there the possiblity that there is a bug in the code base of issue 9959? >> >> >> Best regards >> >> Rouven >> >> >>> Am 18.04.2019 um 19:20 schrieb Robert Mustacchi : >>> >>> On 4/18/19 10:12 , Youzhong Yang wrote: Little bit confused. The page https://www.openindiana.org/download/ shows latest ISO is dated 2018.10, but 9959 fix was submitted on 11/26/2018, I guess Hipster doesn't have it. >>> >>> The ISO is just the install image. Generally, after using that to >>> bootstrap, then folks will update to latest bits via IPS. As a result, >>> the ISO isn't updated (and generally doesn't have to be) quite as often. >>> >>> Robert >>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:38 PM Rouven WEILER wrote: > On my system the issue is solved and the sources are patched accordingly. > Thus, the issue seems to be somewhere else. > > Am 18.04.2019 um 18:27 schrieb Rouven WEILER : > > concerning openindiana I am using the most recent one. I right now asked > if the issue is solved in the latest version. > > another interesting thing is that older samba versions do not throw EBUSY, > although on the same underlying system. > > > > Am 18.04.2019 um 18:07 schrieb Youzhong Yang : > > That is interesting. I am curious about how pthread_mutexattr_init ends up > returning EBUSY. What verison of Openindiana are you running? is there a > link pointing to the fix that it has for 9959? > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Rouven WEILER > wrote: > >> I understand and see that it works, but as written below >> pthread_mutexattr_init throws EBUSY, not pthread_mutex_init. >> >> Also Openindiana seems to include the patch for issue 9959 mentioned. I >> will clarify that to make sure. >> >> I just want to make sure that the patch you suggest aims for the issue >> and is not a workaround. >> >> >> Am 18.04.2019 um 16:09 schrieb Youzhong Yang : >> >> I reproduced the issue on a smartos version which does not have the fix >> for https://www.illumos.org/issues/9959. >> >> The pthread_mutex_init() at line 590 returns EBUSY: >> ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, ); >> >> https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=blob;f=lib/tdb/common/mutex.c;h=8a122d5d6a2ec321bce25cf06062acc808f1e126;hb=HEAD#l590 >> >> >> Then I applied the following patch to lib/tdb/common/mutex.c: >> >> # git grep -B 1 -n pthread_mutex_init lib/tdb/common/mutex.c >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-590- bzero(chain, >> sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:591: ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, >> ); >> -- >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-599- bzero(>allrecord_mutex, >> sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:600: ret = >> pthread_mutex_init(>allrecord_mutex, ); >> -- >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-693- bzero(, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:694: ret = pthread_mutex_init(, ); >> -- >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-891- bzero(ptr, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); >> lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:892: ret = pthread_mutex_init(ptr, ); >> >> It works like a charm. Fair enough? >> >> So again I recommend either of the following two: >> - apply 9959 fix to your OS image, or use a newer version which has 9959 >> fix >> - bzero pthread_mutex_t struct before calling pthread_mutex_init(). >> >> In my environment I applied bzero patch to all pthread_mutex_init() calls >> in the entire samba code base, you know, who knows what is going to >> happen. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 4:29 AM Rouven WEILER >> wrote: >> >>> That sounds reasonable! >>> Could you help me to dtrace that in a feasible way? Up to now I am not >>> used to dtrace. Except knowing what is and that its powerful. >>> >>> Am 18.04.2019 um 09:29 schrieb Jason King
Re: [oi-dev] [developer] [Samba] gencache.tdb: device busy
It's possible there's a bug. It's also possible you're getting really unlucky and the uninitialized mutex looks valid because the magic is valid. On Sun, Apr 21, 2019, 06:10 Rouven WEILER wrote: > Dear all, > > trying to make samba work and getting rid of my error message > > [2019/04/01 09:51:41.112485, 0] > ../../lib/tdb_wrap/tdb_wrap.c:64(tdb_wrap_log) > tdb(/var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb): tdb_open_ex: tdb_mutex_init failed for > /var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb: Device busy > > > I followed the info of Youzhong. It definitely works. So thankx. > BUT: The OS (OpenIndiana; state of April,19th) is patched against the > illumos issue 9959 > > So there might be some mechanism (maybe MUTEX_MAGIC) that avoids the > initialization of the mutex before init. > I am really not deep in all that pthread stuff… > > Is there the possiblity that there is a bug in the code base of issue 9959? > > > Best regards > > Rouven > > > Am 18.04.2019 um 19:20 schrieb Robert Mustacchi : > > On 4/18/19 10:12 , Youzhong Yang wrote: > > Little bit confused. The page https://www.openindiana.org/download/ shows > latest ISO is dated 2018.10, but 9959 fix was submitted on 11/26/2018, I > guess Hipster doesn't have it. > > > The ISO is just the install image. Generally, after using that to > bootstrap, then folks will update to latest bits via IPS. As a result, > the ISO isn't updated (and generally doesn't have to be) quite as often. > > Robert > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:38 PM Rouven WEILER > wrote: > > On my system the issue is solved and the sources are patched accordingly. > Thus, the issue seems to be somewhere else. > > Am 18.04.2019 um 18:27 schrieb Rouven WEILER : > > concerning openindiana I am using the most recent one. I right now asked > if the issue is solved in the latest version. > > another interesting thing is that older samba versions do not throw EBUSY, > although on the same underlying system. > > > > Am 18.04.2019 um 18:07 schrieb Youzhong Yang : > > That is interesting. I am curious about how pthread_mutexattr_init ends up > returning EBUSY. What verison of Openindiana are you running? is there a > link pointing to the fix that it has for 9959? > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Rouven WEILER > wrote: > > I understand and see that it works, but as written below > pthread_mutexattr_init throws EBUSY, not pthread_mutex_init. > > Also Openindiana seems to include the patch for issue 9959 mentioned. I > will clarify that to make sure. > > I just want to make sure that the patch you suggest aims for the issue > and is not a workaround. > > > Am 18.04.2019 um 16:09 schrieb Youzhong Yang : > > I reproduced the issue on a smartos version which does not have the fix > for https://www.illumos.org/issues/9959. > > The pthread_mutex_init() at line 590 returns EBUSY: > ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, ); > > > https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=blob;f=lib/tdb/common/mutex.c;h=8a122d5d6a2ec321bce25cf06062acc808f1e126;hb=HEAD#l590 > > > Then I applied the following patch to lib/tdb/common/mutex.c: > > # git grep -B 1 -n pthread_mutex_init lib/tdb/common/mutex.c > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-590- bzero(chain, > sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:591: ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, > ); > -- > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-599- bzero(>allrecord_mutex, > sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:600: ret = > pthread_mutex_init(>allrecord_mutex, ); > -- > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-693- bzero(, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:694: ret = pthread_mutex_init(, ); > -- > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-891- bzero(ptr, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); > lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:892: ret = pthread_mutex_init(ptr, ); > > It works like a charm. Fair enough? > > So again I recommend either of the following two: > - apply 9959 fix to your OS image, or use a newer version which has 9959 > fix > - bzero pthread_mutex_t struct before calling pthread_mutex_init(). > > In my environment I applied bzero patch to all pthread_mutex_init() calls > in the entire samba code base, you know, who knows what is going to happen. > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 4:29 AM Rouven WEILER > wrote: > > That sounds reasonable! > Could you help me to dtrace that in a feasible way? Up to now I am not > used to dtrace. Except knowing what is and that its powerful. > > Am 18.04.2019 um 09:29 schrieb Jason King : > > It appears that the robust mutexes are mmapped from the .tdb file. > EBUSY means that the mutex has already been intialized. It also appears > that if the TDB_CLEAR_IF_FIRST flag is _not_ set when opening the tdb, it > will try to initialize the mutexes. I’m wondering if the tdb file gets > created, the memory image of the initialized mutexes is getting saved, then > when it’s opened again, if that flag is not set, it tries to re-initialize > the mutexes and fails (because they are already constructed) legitimately > returning EBUSY. If the samba code is in fact trying to
Re: [oi-dev] [developer] [Samba] gencache.tdb: device busy
Dear all, trying to make samba work and getting rid of my error message [2019/04/01 09:51:41.112485, 0] ../../lib/tdb_wrap/tdb_wrap.c:64(tdb_wrap_log) tdb(/var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb): tdb_open_ex: tdb_mutex_init failed for /var/samba/lock/gencache.tdb: Device busy I followed the info of Youzhong. It definitely works. So thankx. BUT: The OS (OpenIndiana; state of April,19th) is patched against the illumos issue 9959 So there might be some mechanism (maybe MUTEX_MAGIC) that avoids the initialization of the mutex before init. I am really not deep in all that pthread stuff… Is there the possiblity that there is a bug in the code base of issue 9959? Best regards Rouven > Am 18.04.2019 um 19:20 schrieb Robert Mustacchi : > > On 4/18/19 10:12 , Youzhong Yang wrote: >> Little bit confused. The page https://www.openindiana.org/download/ shows >> latest ISO is dated 2018.10, but 9959 fix was submitted on 11/26/2018, I >> guess Hipster doesn't have it. > > The ISO is just the install image. Generally, after using that to > bootstrap, then folks will update to latest bits via IPS. As a result, > the ISO isn't updated (and generally doesn't have to be) quite as often. > > Robert > >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:38 PM Rouven WEILER >> wrote: >> >>> On my system the issue is solved and the sources are patched accordingly. >>> Thus, the issue seems to be somewhere else. >>> >>> Am 18.04.2019 um 18:27 schrieb Rouven WEILER : >>> >>> concerning openindiana I am using the most recent one. I right now asked >>> if the issue is solved in the latest version. >>> >>> another interesting thing is that older samba versions do not throw EBUSY, >>> although on the same underlying system. >>> >>> >>> >>> Am 18.04.2019 um 18:07 schrieb Youzhong Yang : >>> >>> That is interesting. I am curious about how pthread_mutexattr_init ends up >>> returning EBUSY. What verison of Openindiana are you running? is there a >>> link pointing to the fix that it has for 9959? >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Rouven WEILER >>> wrote: >>> I understand and see that it works, but as written below pthread_mutexattr_init throws EBUSY, not pthread_mutex_init. Also Openindiana seems to include the patch for issue 9959 mentioned. I will clarify that to make sure. I just want to make sure that the patch you suggest aims for the issue and is not a workaround. Am 18.04.2019 um 16:09 schrieb Youzhong Yang : I reproduced the issue on a smartos version which does not have the fix for https://www.illumos.org/issues/9959. The pthread_mutex_init() at line 590 returns EBUSY: ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, ); https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=blob;f=lib/tdb/common/mutex.c;h=8a122d5d6a2ec321bce25cf06062acc808f1e126;hb=HEAD#l590 Then I applied the following patch to lib/tdb/common/mutex.c: # git grep -B 1 -n pthread_mutex_init lib/tdb/common/mutex.c lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-590- bzero(chain, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:591: ret = pthread_mutex_init(chain, ); -- lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-599- bzero(>allrecord_mutex, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:600: ret = pthread_mutex_init(>allrecord_mutex, ); -- lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-693- bzero(, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:694: ret = pthread_mutex_init(, ); -- lib/tdb/common/mutex.c-891- bzero(ptr, sizeof(pthread_mutex_t)); lib/tdb/common/mutex.c:892: ret = pthread_mutex_init(ptr, ); It works like a charm. Fair enough? So again I recommend either of the following two: - apply 9959 fix to your OS image, or use a newer version which has 9959 fix - bzero pthread_mutex_t struct before calling pthread_mutex_init(). In my environment I applied bzero patch to all pthread_mutex_init() calls in the entire samba code base, you know, who knows what is going to happen. On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 4:29 AM Rouven WEILER wrote: > That sounds reasonable! > Could you help me to dtrace that in a feasible way? Up to now I am not > used to dtrace. Except knowing what is and that its powerful. > > Am 18.04.2019 um 09:29 schrieb Jason King : > > It appears that the robust mutexes are mmapped from the .tdb file. > EBUSY means that the mutex has already been intialized. It also appears > that if the TDB_CLEAR_IF_FIRST flag is _not_ set when opening the tdb, it > will try to initialize the mutexes. I’m wondering if the tdb file gets > created, the memory image of the initialized mutexes is getting saved, > then > when it’s opened again, if that flag is not set, it tries to re-initialize > the mutexes and fails (because they are already constructed) legitimately >
