Skip to content

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Dec 8, 2025

Cherry-picked from #58768

…locks (#58768)

*** SIGSEGV unknown detail explain (@0x0) received by PID 2118050 (TID
2119672 OR 0x7f969ebf3640) from PID 0; stack trace: ***
0# doris::signal::(anonymous namespace)::FailureSignalHandler(int,
siginfo_t*, void*) at
/mnt/disk3/pipeline/repo/selectdb-core_branch-selectdb-doris-3.1/selectdb-core/be/src/common/signal_handler.h:421
1# PosixSignals::chained_handler(int, siginfo*, void*) [clone .part.0]
in /usr/lib/jvm/java-17-openjdk-amd64/lib/server/libjvm.so
2# JVM_handle_linux_signal in
/usr/lib/jvm/java-17-openjdk-amd64/lib/server/libjvm.so
 3# 0x00007F9A01EF7520 in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
4# unsigned long
moodycamel::ConcurrentQueue<std::shared_ptr<doris::io::FileBlock>,
moodycamel::ConcurrentQueueDefaultTraits>::ImplicitProducer::dequeue_bulk<std::shared_ptr<doris::io::FileBlock>*>(std::shared_ptr<doris::io::FileBlock>*&,
unsigned long) at
/mnt/disk3/pipeline/repo/selectdb-core_branch-selectdb-doris-3.1/selectdb-core/thirdparty/installed/include/concurrentqueue.h:2802
5# doris::io::BlockFileCache::clear_need_update_lru_blocks() at
/mnt/disk3/pipeline/repo/selectdb-core_branch-selectdb-doris-3.1/selectdb-core/be/src/io/cache/block_file_cache.cpp:2289
6# doris::io::BlockFileCache::clear_file_cache_directly[abi:cxx11]() at
/mnt/disk3/pipeline/repo/selectdb-core_branch-selectdb-doris-3.1/selectdb-core/be/src/io/cache/block_file_cache.cpp:2338
7# doris::io::FileCacheFactory::clear_file_caches[abi:cxx11](bool) at
/mnt/disk3/pipeline/repo/selectdb-core_branch-selectdb-doris-3.1/selectdb-core/be/src/io/cache/block_file_cache_factory.cpp:210
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner December 8, 2025 09:53
@hello-stephen
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@dataroaring dataroaring closed this Dec 8, 2025
@dataroaring dataroaring reopened this Dec 8, 2025
@hello-stephen
Copy link
Contributor

run buildall

@hello-stephen
Copy link
Contributor

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 57.14% (4/7) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 53.18% (18350/34507)
Line Coverage 38.76% (168687/435197)
Region Coverage 33.53% (130495/389185)
Branch Coverage 34.43% (56282/163451)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants