Hello Zac Morris, >> Yeah, I didn't know how to update the case. Is there a web front-end for >> updating/tracking the cases? I couldn't figure out how to do it via email.
You just need to send the answers also to 921...@bugs.debian.org
as receiver or CC. Then all the information is collected in this page:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=921310
>> The dmesg output was: segfault error 4 (memory?)
Is this the complete line in dmesg output?
Forwarding the information to the bug.
Kind regards,
Bernhard
-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: Bug#921310: dnsmasq "segment fault" bug when total conf
files size is too large
Datum: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 15:31:52 -0500
Von: Zac Morris <z...@zacwolf.com>
An: Bernhard Übelacker <bernha...@mailbox.org>
Yeah, I didn't know how to update the case. Is there a web front-end for
updating/tracking the cases? I couldn't figure out how to do it via email.
The dmesg output was: segfault error 4 (memory?)
So hopefully walking you through it might help?
When I use the conf-file=parm in my config file to point to any of the
dnsmasq formatted block lists provided by https://energized.pro/#packs,
using anything larger than Basic (which contains about 466000 entries)
causes the segfault error 4 after just a few DNS queries.
Using Basic doesn't cause the segfault, but from the machine running
dnsmasq, when I use a dig (using the Basic dnsmasq format file added via
conf-file= ) it adds over 500ms to the lookup. (I got 4 seconds once,
but haven't been able to replicate that again). I didn't use this setup
very long so it may have caused the segfault as well after some time.
What I ended up doing is using the /etc/hosts version of the energized
files.
#my local static network devices
addn-hosts=/etc/dnsmasq.d/hosts/hosts.local
#Basic etc/hosts formated file provided by Energized.pro
addn-hosts=/etc/dnsmasq.d/hosts/hosts.block
When I do that I'm getting an average new domain lookup of 23ms
non-dnssec, 65ms with dnssec), with 0ms on subsequent (cached, as
expected) lookups either way.
I understand that dnsmasq is geared more towards small memory devices,
so this may not be a priority.
It would seem that loading large address=based conf files causes a
segfault error 4 if it's too larger, but if it's large (but not too
larger) it adds substantial time to a lookup, but why would
using addn-hosts= with the the same huge ~466000 entries add no time to
the lookup nor cause an error 4?
I'm attaching my current lan.conf which is loaded from the default
/etc/dnsmasq.conf
THANKS!!!
lan.conf
Description: Binary data
