Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio 1.5 stops processing messages

Hi, I have experienced a new lock. I have seen that 4 of the UDP worker processes, but not all, have gone 100% cpu. Kamailio was still able to process messages through the rest of UDP worker processes. By checking the logs I can see that the 4 blocked processes have stopped handling messages at the same time. I have attached to the blocked processes and the backtrace looks similar to the previous one except that it seems that the lock is not exactly related to t_replicate. #0 0xb7f24410 in ?? () #1 0xbf9cdeb8 in ?? () #2 0x00000001 in ?? () #3 0xa72eb318 in ?? () #4 0xb7e804ac in sched_yield () from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 #5 0xb7aee463 in lock_hash (i=13692) at ../../mem/../fastlock.h:182 #6 0xb7b09587 in t_lookup_request (p_msg=0x81d9708, leave_new_locked=1) at t_lookup.c:468 #7 0xb7b0a4ae in t_newtran (p_msg=0x81d9708) at t_lookup.c:1124 #8 0xb7afc40c in t_relay_to (p_msg=0x81d9708, proxy=0x0, flags=8) at t_funcs.c:212 #9 0xb7b0fac7 in w_t_relay (p_msg=0x81d9708, proxy=0x0, flags=0x8 <Address 0x8 out of bounds>) at tm.c:1002 #10 0x0805301c in do_action (a=0x818c370, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:874 #11 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x818c370, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #12 0x0809c304 in eval_expr (e=0x818c3d8, msg=0x81d9708, val=0x0) at route.c:1171 #13 0x0809bd80 in eval_expr (e=0x818c400, msg=0x81d9708, val=0x0) at route.c:1488 #14 0x0809bd16 in eval_expr (e=0x818c428, msg=0x81d9708, val=0x0) at route.c:1493 #15 0x080527ed in do_action (a=0x818c740, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:729 #16 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x818be08, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #17 0x08053efb in do_action (a=0x81a6a48, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:120 #18 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x81a14e0, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #19 0x08053efb in do_action (a=0x81c29f0, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:120 #20 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x81c2698, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #21 0x08054491 in do_action (a=0x81c2b48, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:746 #22 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x81c2030, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #23 0x08053efb in do_action (a=0x8193278, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:120 #24 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x8193278, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #25 0x08054491 in do_action (a=0x8193418, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:746 #26 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x8193418, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #27 0x08054f2d in do_action (a=0x8193480, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:752 #28 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x81922f0, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #29 0x08054491 in do_action (a=0x81934e8, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:746 #30 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x818ee78, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #31 0x08053efb in do_action (a=0x81b3448, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:120 #32 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x81b0ed0, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #33 0x08054491 in do_action (a=0x81b5f68, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:746 #34 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x81b5f68, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #35 0x08054f2d in do_action (a=0x81b5fd0, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:752 #36 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x81aefd0, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #37 0x08053efb in do_action (a=0x818bc08, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:120 #38 0x080557aa in run_action_list (a=0x8187910, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:145 #39 0x08055b43 in run_top_route (a=0x8187910, msg=0x81d9708) at action.c:120 #40 0x0808c659 in receive_msg ( buf=0x8158040 "INVITE sip:xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.com<sip%3Axxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.com>SIP/2.0\r\nRecord-Route: <sip:10.100.2.252;lr=on;ftag=as6897d90b>\r\nVia: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.100.2.252;branch=z9hG4bKc753.2c8885d4.0\r\nVia: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.100.2.253:5060;bra"..., len=896, rcv_info=0xbf9d0aa4) at receive.c:175 #41 0x080c3ea3 in udp_rcv_loop () at udp_server.c:449 #42 0x0806e394 in main (argc=9, argv=0xbf9d0c84) at main.c:774 I hope this provides some new hints on what might be happening. Thanks, Santi 2010/5/13 Santiago Gimeno &lt;santiago.gimeno(a)gmail.com&gt;