openldap-bugs December 2023

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
119 discussions

[Issue 9593] New: excessive null check in set_chase()
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 24 Mar '26

24 Mar '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9593 Issue ID: 9593 Summary: excessive null check in set_chase() Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: grapvar(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Looks like slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ) can't return null, so return value at line 411 should be treated like one at line 402: servers/slapd/sets.c:399, set_chase(): for ( i = 0; !BER_BVISNULL( &set[ i ] ); i++ ) { vals = gatherer( cp, &set[ i ], desc ); if ( vals != NULL ) { /*402: */ nset = slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ); } } ber_bvarray_free_x( set, cp->set_op->o_tmpmemctx ); if ( closure ) { for ( i = 0; !BER_BVISNULL( &nset[ i ] ); i++ ) { vals = gatherer( cp, &nset[ i ], desc ); if ( vals != NULL ) { /*411: */ nset = slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ); if ( nset == NULL ) { break; } } } } diff --git a/servers/slapd/sets.c b/servers/slapd/sets.c index fc7b72c8b..17a6ec2c1 100644 --- a/servers/slapd/sets.c +++ b/servers/slapd/sets.c @@ -409,9 +409,6 @@ set_chase( SLAP_SET_GATHER gatherer, vals = gatherer( cp, &nset[ i ], desc ); if ( vals != NULL ) { nset = slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ); - if ( nset == NULL ) { - break; - } If I'm wrong, return value at line 402 must be checked for null. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 9909] New: slap* tools leak cn=config entries on shutdown
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 20 Mar '26

20 Mar '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9909 Issue ID: 9909 Summary: slap* tools leak cn=config entries on shutdown Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- slap* tools set up their in-memory cn=config structures but cfb->cb_root is never released on shutdown. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10013] New: Some code (ppolicy, etc.) ignores REP_CTRLS_MUSTBEFREED when touching rs->sr_ctrls
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Mar '26

18 Mar '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10013 Issue ID: 10013 Summary: Some code (ppolicy, etc.) ignores REP_CTRLS_MUSTBEFREED when touching rs->sr_ctrls Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Certain parts of the source indicate that rs->sr_ctrls shouldn't be realloc'd/free'd unless REP_CTRLS_MUSTBEFREED is set, but then other parts of slapd (slap_ctrl_whatFailed_add, glue_op_search?, ...) and overlays (ppolicy, syncprov, ...) will blindly overwrite and/or realloc it. slap_add_control() (an analog of slap_add_controls()) might be useful for this, possibly alongside some way to free the other data kept around to streamline the code other users need for correct operation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Bug 9244] New: API calls blocking after async connect
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 02 Mar '26

02 Mar '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9244 Bug ID: 9244 Summary: API calls blocking after async connect Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.49 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ryan(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 721 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=721&action=edit async connect test without TLS My understanding of LDAP_OPT_CONNECT_ASYNC is that the attached program should not block. If the connection does not establish fast enough, the bind call is supposed to return LDAP_X_CONNECTING. (At least that's how I understand it, based on the original behaviour (circa 2.4.23 up to 2.4.40) as well as the bind loop in back-meta. On the other hand, the man page does "Subsequent calls to library routines will poll for completion of the connect before performing further operations" which might be interpreted as meaning they would block...) In current releases it does block, as demonstrated by strace on Linux (latency added using 'tc qdisc'): [...] connect(3, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(389), sin_addr=inet_addr("192.168.1.204")}, 16) = -1 EINPROGRESS (Operation now in progress) write(3, "0\f\2\1\1`\7\2\1\3\4\0\200\0", 14) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable) poll([{fd=3, events=POLLOUT|POLLERR|POLLHUP}], 1, -1) = 1 ([{fd=3, revents=POLLOUT}]) write(3, "0\f\2\1\1`\7\2\1\3\4\0\200\0", 14) = 14 poll([{fd=3, events=POLLIN|POLLPRI}], 1, -1) = 1 ([{fd=3, revents=POLLIN}]) read(3, "0\f\2\1\1a\7\n", 8) = 8 read(3, "\1\0\4\0\4\0", 6) = 6 write(2, "OK: ldap_simple_bind_returned 0 "..., 42OK: ldap_simple_bind_returned 0 (Success) ) = 42 [...] As discussed in IRC, I believe I bisected this down to commit ae6347bac, from bug 8022. The reasoning is sound, but ldap_int_open_connection does not actually return -2, only -1 or 0. The patch is simple enough, but I'm also looking at some later commits that were probably done to work around this, and might not be needed now (bug 8957, bug 8968, bug 8980). Also need to test all setups thoroughly (ldap, ldaps, STARTTLS, not to mention back-meta/asyncmeta). I also notice that LDAP_OPT_CONNECT_ASYNC is not effective unless LDAP_OPT_NETWORK_TIMEOUT is also set. It might be intentional, but the man page doesn't mention this specifically, and I don't see why it would be necessary... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 17

[Issue 9886] New: At "sync" logging, nothing shows how long a write op took on consumers
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 02 Mar '26

02 Mar '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9886 Issue ID: 9886 Summary: At "sync" logging, nothing shows how long a write op took on consumers Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- If sync logging is enabled on a consumer, there's no etime logged which means it is not possible to see how long a write op took on that consumer. This can be useful information to see how the node is performing, particularly if it is a read only node where there will be no general MOD timing logged. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 9513] New: Enhanced debug output
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Feb '26

12 Feb '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9513 Issue ID: 9513 Summary: Enhanced debug output Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- While debugging ITS#9479 I needed more information on which threads were doing what actions. Also, when looking for delays/hangs/race conditions, the 1-second granularity of the debug msg timestamp was inadequate. And also, some of the debug output for the Search operation was being done in separate Debug calls for a single line of output. This gets jumbled up pretty badly if other threads are printing output as well. New patch set will extend the debug timestamp to have fractional seconds too; it will use clock_gettime for nanosecond resolution if available, otherwise use gettimeofday for microsecond resolution. Also tweak the Search debug output to only use one Debug invocation per line of output. This is MR!279. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Bug 9225] New: back-mdb: Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Feb '26

12 Feb '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9225 Bug ID: 9225 Summary: back-mdb: Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit in back-mdb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 10

[Bug 9224] New: Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Feb '26

12 Feb '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9224 Bug ID: 9224 Summary: Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit Product: LMDB Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- In LMDB, add support for PREPARE/2-phase commits -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Issue 10026] New: Refresh handling can skip entries (si_dirty not managed properly)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 10 Feb '26

10 Feb '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10026 Issue ID: 10026 Summary: Refresh handling can skip entries (si_dirty not managed properly) Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Take MPR plain syncrepl with 3+ providers. When a provider's own syncrepl session transitions to persist and a it starts a new parallel session towards another host, that session always has to start as a refresh. If that refresh serves entries to us, our handling of si_dirty is not consistent: - if the existing persist session serves some of these entries to us, we can "forget" to pass the others to a newly connected consumer - same if the refresh is abandoned and we start refreshing from a different provider that might be behind what we were being served (again our consumers could suffer) - if we restart, si_dirty is forgotten and our consumers suffer even worse We might need to be told (at the beginning of the refresh?) what the end state we're going for is, so we can keep si_dirty on until then. And somehow persist that knowledge in the DB... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 21

[Issue 10132] New: manage syncrepl as a cn=config entry
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 27 Jan '26

27 Jan '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10132 Issue ID: 10132 Summary: manage syncrepl as a cn=config entry Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Maybe it being exposed through both places (olcSyncrepl and the entry) could be a way to manage the transition (unless we have a way to handle cn=config schema upgrades internally). Uncertain as to how that affects cn=config replication. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs December 2023