Creation Zone

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Saturday, 1 November 2008

Ramifications of the Solaris 10 kernel patch 137111

Posted on 21:12 by Unknown
Summary

A recent code change in Solaris 10 inadvertantly exposed an inherent bug in some of the 32-bit applications that rely on their own memory allocators. Due to this, some of the 3rd party applications which were working earlier without the KU 137111 may crash on Solaris 10/SPARC with the KU 137111 (any revision).

Symptoms & the Cause

It was identified that majority of such application failures are mainly due to the applications' custom memory allocator that incorrectly returns 4-byte aligned mutexes in place of the required 8-byte aligned mutexes. In Solaris, mutex_t and pthread_mutex_t structures have been defined to be aligned on an 8-byte boundary. Both of those structures contain the upad64_t member, which is a double even for the 32-bit applications. The natural alignment of a double is 8 bytes; and per the SPARC Compliance Definition 2.4, the structures must be aligned according to their strictest member. That is, applications which create 4-byte aligned mutexes are technically non-compliant on Solaris/SPARC (for the sake of simplicity, such code will be referred to as the non-complying code for the remainder of this blog entry).

Due to a change in the implementation of the userland mutexes introduced by CR 6296770 in KU 137111-01, objects of type mutex_t and pthread_mutex_t must start at 8-byte aligned addresses. If this requirement is not satisfied, all non-compliant applications on Solaris/SPARC may fail with the signal SEGV with a callstack similar to the following one or with similar callstacks containing the function mutex_trylock_process.


*_atomic_cas_64(0x141f2c, 0x0, 0xff000000, 0x1651, 0xff000000, 0x466d90)
set_lock_byte64(0x0, 0x1651, 0xff000000, 0x0, 0xfec82a00, 0x0)
fast_process_lock(0x141f24, 0x0, 0x1, 0x1, 0x0, 0xfeae5780)
...


Patches & the Next Steps

Note that only non-compliant 32-bit applications will be affected by the KU 137111. All other complying 32-bit applications continue to run as expected even with the KU 137111 - hence the customers, partners, ISVs and the other software vendors must understand the fact that it is not a Solaris issue. Customers running into this issue must work with the respective software vendors to obtain a patch/fix. We suggest the ISVs and the rest of the software vendors to pro-actively check their 32-bit native code for any discrepancies like the one mentioned in this blog entry.

In our testing of some of the enterprise applications, we have identified Oracle's Siebel CRM as one of the potential applications that is vulnerable to the KU 137111. It appears that IBM's Lotus Domino Server is also prone to a crash on Solaris 10 with the same kernet patch. Speaking of these two known cases, Oracle/Siebel and IBM/Lotus Domino customers (running Solaris) should approach Oracle and IBM Corporations respectively but not Sun Microsystems for a proper fix.

As it may take some time for the ISVs / software vendors to identify and fix the non-complying code in their applications, Sun is planning to provide an interim fix to the mutex byte alignment issue in the form of a Solaris kernel patch. As of this writing, we expect the fix to be integrated into the KU 137137-07. The fix is already available in the latest update of the Solaris, Solaris 10 10/08. Those who cannot upgrade to Solaris 10 10/08 from the prior versions of Solaris 10 must wait for the patch KU 137137-07.

One must note that the fix in Solaris is a tentative one that allows the non-complying code to run on SPARC hardware for the time being. There is no guarantee that the non-complying code continues to run 'as is' in the future with new Solaris kernel patches and/or major updates/releases of the Solaris operating system. So the best long term solution is for the software vendors to fix the non-compliant code before it is too late.

Acknowledgments

Steve S and Roger F of Sun Microsystems.

(Originally posted at:
http://blogs.sun.com/mandalika/entry/ramifications_of_the_solaris_10
)
________________
Technorati Tags:
 Sun |  Solaris |  Kernel Patch |  Oracle |  Siebel |  IBM |  Lotus Domino
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • *nix: Workaround to cannot find zipfile directory in one of file.zip or file.zip.zip ..
    Symptom: You are trying to extract the archived files off of a huge (any file with size > 2 GB or 4GB, depending on the OS) ZIP file with...
  • JDS: Installing Sun Java Desktop System 2.0
    This document will guide you through the process of installing JDS 2.0 on a PC from integrated CDROM images Requirements I...
  • Linux: Installing Source RPM (SRPM) package
    RPM stands for RedHat Package Manager. RPM is a system for installing and managing software & most common software package manager used ...
  • Solaris: malloc Vs mtmalloc
    Performance of Single Vs Multi-threaded application Memory allocation performance in single and multithreaded environments is an important a...
  • C/C++: Printing Stack Trace with printstack() on Solaris
    libc on Solaris 9 and later, provides a useful function called printstack , to print a symbolic stack trace to the specified file descripto...
  • Installing MySQL 5.0.51b from the Source Code on Sun Solaris
    Building and installing the MySQL server from the source code is relatively very easy when compared to many other OSS applications. At least...
  • Oracle Apps on T2000: ORA-04020 during Autoinvoice
    The goal of this brief blog post is to provide a quick solution to all Sun-Oracle customers who may run into a deadlock when a handful of th...
  • Siebel Connection Broker Load Balancing Algorithm
    Siebel server architecture supports spawning multiple application object manager processes. The Siebel Connection Broker, SCBroker, tries to...
  • 64-bit dbx: internal error: signal SIGBUS (invalid address alignment)
    The other day I was chasing some lock contention issue with a 64-bit application running on Solaris 10 Update 1; and stumbled with an unexpe...
  • Oracle 10gR2/Solaris x64: Fixing ORA-20000: Oracle Text errors
    First, some facts: * Oracle Applications 11.5.10 (aka E-Business Suite 11 i ) database is now supported on Solaris 10 for x86-64 architectur...

Categories

  • 80s music playlist
  • bandwidth iperf network solaris
  • best
  • black friday
  • breakdown database groups locality oracle pmap sga solaris
  • buy
  • deal
  • ebiz ebs hrms oracle payroll
  • emca oracle rdbms database ORA-01034
  • friday
  • Garmin
  • generic+discussion software installer
  • GPS
  • how-to solaris mmap
  • impdp ora-01089 oracle rdbms solaris tips upgrade workarounds zombie
  • Magellan
  • music
  • Navigation
  • OATS Oracle
  • Oracle Business+Intelligence Analytics Solaris SPARC T4
  • oracle database flashback FDA
  • Oracle Database RDBMS Redo Flash+Storage
  • oracle database solaris
  • oracle database solaris resource manager virtualization consolidation
  • Oracle EBS E-Business+Suite SPARC SuperCluster Optimized+Solution
  • Oracle EBS E-Business+Suite Workaround Tip
  • oracle lob bfile blob securefile rdbms database tips performance clob
  • oracle obiee analytics presentation+services
  • Oracle OID LDAP ADS
  • Oracle OID LDAP SPARC T5 T5-2 Benchmark
  • oracle pls-00201 dbms_system
  • oracle siebel CRM SCBroker load+balancing
  • Oracle Siebel Sun SPARC T4 Benchmark
  • Oracle Siebel Sun SPARC T5 Benchmark T5-2
  • Oracle Solaris
  • Oracle Solaris Database RDBMS Redo Flash F40 AWR
  • oracle solaris rpc statd RPC troubleshooting
  • oracle solaris svm solaris+volume+manager
  • Oracle Solaris Tips
  • oracle+solaris
  • RDC
  • sale
  • Smartphone Samsung Galaxy S2 Phone+Shutter Tip Android ICS
  • solaris oracle database fmw weblogic java dfw
  • SuperCluster Oracle Database RDBMS RAC Solaris Zones
  • tee
  • thanksgiving sale
  • tips
  • TomTom
  • windows

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (16)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2012 (14)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2011 (15)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2010 (19)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (5)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2009 (25)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (5)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ▼  2008 (34)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ▼  November (2)
      • Yet Another Siebel 8.0 PSPP Benchmark on Sun CMT H...
      • Ramifications of the Solaris 10 kernel patch 137111
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ►  2007 (33)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (5)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2006 (40)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (6)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (5)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2005 (72)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (6)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (5)
    • ►  July (10)
    • ►  June (8)
    • ►  May (9)
    • ►  April (6)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  February (5)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ►  2004 (36)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (5)
    • ►  October (12)
    • ►  September (18)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile