HI,

if you'd like to test the latest 'dnsmasq 2.75', containing the "latest 
upstream patches" I could send you the download link of the version 
which is now running for about two weeks here without any crashes. 
Besides, using DNS.WATCH-servers, I never had any crashes, but it could 
be worth a try.

I'm just not really sure - this version was compiled an an "Intel Core 2 
Duo" - is this ready for "AMD Geode" or do you need a somewhat ~special 
version!?

Regards,
Matthias

On 05.12.2015 05:19, R. W. Rodolico wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Just a follow up on the dnsmasq issue. It happened again tonight, with
> logs similar to what I had before. See at the bottom. Here is the
> sequence of events:
>
> I was opening http://news.bbc.co.uk (which redirects to
> http://www.bbc.com/news). It made it halfway through the page when
> dnsmasq apparently died (some of the images did not come up). I then
> tried to open a few additional pages, all at www.bbc.com, and when
> they all failed, I checked the server. Note that at 21:53:13 it was
> running fine, and at 21:54.25 it died, during a page load.
>
> Just prior to all this, I had loaded several pages, each requiring a
> DNS operation. It appeared dnsmasq died during the loading of the last
> of them (news.bbc.co.uk) as that one had images only partially
> complete. The sites were.
>
> http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/
> http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kera/news.newsmain
> http://planet.ipfire.org/
> http://www.kyivpost.com/
>
> I tend to open these all at the same time in Firefox and they
> generally work just fine. At the time I opened these, I also had 12
> other tabs open in three additional instances of Firefox, one tab open
> in Chromium, my mail client open with 4 accounts. No other machines
> were on in the location.
>
> I see no patterns at all. The last time it happened, I do not believe
> I had nearly as many sessions open (there are always around 12 web
> pages open in two Firefox windows). It is weird in that it happened
> about a week ago also.
>
> The IPFire machine is as follows:
> AMD Geode, single core, 500Mhz
> 512M RAM, no swap
> 4 VIA VT6105M NIC's, Red, Green and two bridged Green
> 1 TP-Link TL-WN75IND wireless PCI card (Qualcomm Atheros AR9227
> Wireless NIC)
>
> With the exception of bridging two NIC's into the Green, and the
> wireless NIC, this is a standard configuration I have used in dozens
> of firewalls.
>
> Michael, does any of this match your machine that has had the issue?
> Do you think I should look for anything else, or do you want to just
> wait for Core 96 and see if the new dnsmasq fixes it.
>
> Rod
>
> ========================================================================
> Dec  4 21:53:13 dd-router dnsmasq[2801]: reading
> /var/state/dhcp/dhcpd.leases
> Dec  4 21:54:25 dd-router kernel: dnsmasq[2801]: segfault at 0 ip
> 0805daaf sp 5ec22580 error 4 in dnsmasq[8048000+32000]
> Dec  4 21:54:25 dd-router kernel: grsec: Segmentation fault occurred
> at    (nil) in /usr/sbin/dnsmasq[dnsmasq:2801] uid/euid:99/99
> gid/egid:40/40, parent /sbin/init[init:1] uid/euid:0/0 gid/egid:0/0
> Dec  4 21:54:25 dd-router kernel: grsec: bruteforce prevention
> initiated due to crash of /usr/sbin/dnsmasq against uid 99, banning
> suid/sgid execs for 15 minutes.  Please investigate the crash report
> for /usr/sbin/dnsmasq[dnsmasq:2801] uid/euid:99/99 gid/egid:40/40,
> parent /sbin/init[init:1] uid/euid:0/0 gid/egid:0/0
> ========================================================================
>
>
> On 12/01/2015 10:40 PM, R. W. Rodolico wrote:
>> I tried to reproduce it, but was not successful. I saw no
>> correlation between the two times it happened. If it breaks again,
>> I'll see if I can create a conditions list, however.
>>
>> My office firewall is set to always run the testing tree, so as
>> soon as 96 goes into beta, it will automatically upgrade (I keep a
>> very, very old router around in case I completely mess it up with
>> the upgrade! ).
>>
>> I really hate giving a report that says "this broke." I know you
>> need more information than that.
>>
>> Rod
>>
>> On 12/01/2015 04:39 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>
>>> yes, dnsmasq has some stability issues. This has become way
>>> better since a few releases, but it is still not at the level
>>> where it should be.
>>
>>> Have you any information about how to reproduce the crash? I
>>> experienced them for a time, but they were all random and I
>>> could not debug this a lot.
>>
>>> I just merged a patch with some fixes. Maybe it has been fixed in
>>>  there. Please test Core Update 96 as soon as it becomes
>>> available for testing.
>>
>>> Best, -Michael
>>
>>> On Fri, 2015-11-27 at 16:32 -0600, R. W. Rodolico wrote:
>>>> I am running 95 and have had two times in the past couple of
>>>> weeks where dnsmasq has died on me. I have been able to fix
>>>> the problem by starting it up again and it works just fine.
>>>>
>>>> The error appears to be associated with these log entries:
>>>>
>>>> Nov 24 13:38:26 dd-router kernel: dnsmasq[2789]: segfault at 0
>>>> ip 0805daaf sp 5af771e0 error 4 in dnsmasq[8048000+32000] Nov
>>>> 24 13:38:26 dd-router kernel: grsec: Segmentation fault
>>>> occurred at (nil) in /usr/sbin/dnsmasq[dnsmasq:2789]
>>>> uid/euid:99/99 gid/egid:40/40, parent /sbin/init[init:1]
>>>> uid/euid:0/0 gid/egid:0/0 Nov 24 13:38:26 dd-router kernel:
>>>> grsec: bruteforce prevention initiated due to crash of
>>>> /usr/sbin/dnsmasq against uid 99, banning suid/sgid execs for
>>>> 15 minutes.  Please investigate the crash report for
>>>> /usr/sbin/dnsmasq[dnsmasq:2789] uid/euid:99/99 gid/egid:40/40,
>>>> parent /sbin/init[init:1] uid/euid:0/0 gid/egid:0/0
>>>>
>>>> this is a fresh install of IPFire 94, then upgrade to 95.
>>>> Please let me know what I can do to further troubleshoot this.
>>>>
>>>> Rod
>>
>>
>
> - --
> Rod Rodolico
> Daily Data, Inc.
> POB 140465
> Dallas TX 75214-0465
> 214.827.2170
> http://www.dailydata.net
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlZiZeQACgkQuVY3UpYMlTTr3wCfdDrr4+xDjM+rjopuFsUDkIPm
> Je4An1fE+C4Jk3MKbTS1JpBxCev0HDR5
> =ODLv
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>