Because our monotonic time interface doesn't play well with value set to 0,
always initialize to now() the scheduler_last_run at init() of the KIST
scheduler.
Fixes#23696
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
When a channel is scheduled and flush cells returns 0 that is no cells to
flush, we flag it back in waiting for cells so it doesn't get stuck in a
possible infinite loop.
It has been observed on moria1 where a closed channel end up in the scheduler
where the flush process returned 0 cells but it was ultimately kept in the
scheduling loop forever. We suspect that this is due to a more deeper problem
in tor where the channel_more_to_flush() is actually looking at the wrong
queue and was returning 1 for an empty channel thus putting the channel in the
"Case 4" of the scheduler which is to go back in pending state thus
re-considered at the next iteration.
This is a fix that allows the KIST scheduler to recover properly from a not
entirelly diagnosed problem in tor.
Fixes#23676
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
When we added single_conn_free_bytes(), we cleared the outbuf on a
connection without setting outbuf_flushlen() to 0. This could cause
an assertion failure later on in flush_buf().
Fixes bug 23690; bugfix on 0.2.6.1-alpha.
This caused a BUG log when we noticed that the circuit had no
channel. The likeliest culprit for exposing that behavior is
d769cab3e5, where we made circuit_mark_for_close() NULL out
the n_chan and p_chan fields of the circuit.
Fixes bug 8185; bugfix on 0.2.5.4-alpha, I think.
My current theory is that this is just a marked circuit that hasn't
closed yet, but let's gather more information in case that theory is
wrong.
Diagnostic for 8185.
This patch ensures that we return TOR_COMPRESS_BUFFER_FULL in case we
have a input bytes left to process, but are out of output buffer or in
case we need to finish where the compression implementation might need
to write an epilogue.
See: https://bugs.torproject.org/23551
Back in 0.2.4.3-alpha (e106812a77), when we switched from using
double to using uint64 for selecting by bandwidth, I got the math
wrong: I should have used llround(x), or (uint64_t)(x+0.5), but
instead I wrote llround(x+0.5). That means we would always round
up, rather than rounding to the closest integer
Fixes bug 23318; bugfix on 0.2.4.3-alpha.
The clock_skew_warning() refactoring allowed calls from
or_state_load() to control_event_bootstrap_problem() to occur prior
bootstrap phase 0, causing an assertion failure. Initialize the
bootstrap status prior to calling clock_skew_warning() from
or_state_load().
or_state_load() was using an incorrect sign convention when calling
clock_skew_warning() to warn about state file clock skew. This caused
the wording of the warning to be incorrect about the direction of the
skew.
