 |
 |
The problem that we found with this patch is that it appeared to just move the problem. By avoiding the call to UnregisterTask() may leave the task hanging around with a reference to the new deleted channel object. That simply appeared to create a SEGV in the opposite direction (i.e. task to channel vs channel to task). Given that the problem doesn't happen often makes this one really hard to solve and will likely require some redesign to avoid a fatal task/channel dependency. Frankly, I'm surprised that the EOS folks picked up this patch given its problematic nature. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/pull/1947#issuecomment-1506151910 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <[log in to unmask]> ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1