Crash Dump Analysis Patterns (Part 182)

This is a new pattern that we call Error Reporting Fault. It’s about the faults in error reporting infrastructure. The latter should be guarded against such faults and avoid recursion. Here is a summary example of such a pattern on Windows platforms that involve Windows Error Reporting (WER).

In a complete memory dump we notice thousands of WerFault.exe processes:

0: kd> !process 0 0
PROCESS fffffa8058010380
SessionId: 2  Cid: 488f0    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 27cb8
DirBase: 25640c000  ObjectTable: fffff8a06cd2ac50  HandleCount:  54.
Image: WerFault.exe

PROCESS fffffa805bbd5970
SessionId: 2  Cid: 4801c    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 27cb8
DirBase: 2c3f69000  ObjectTable: fffff8a040563af0  HandleCount:  54.
Image: WerFault.exe

PROCESS fffffa8078aec060
SessionId: 2  Cid: 3feac    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 488f0
DirBase: abd200000  ObjectTable: fffff8a07851a0a0  HandleCount:  59.
Image: WerFault.exe

PROCESS fffffa805bbe9a10
SessionId: 2  Cid: 3d8b8    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 4801c
DirBase: 261f91000  ObjectTable: fffff8a02d864d40  HandleCount:  56.
Image: WerFault.exe

PROCESS fffffa805bd29060
SessionId: 2  Cid: 1142c    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 3feac
DirBase: 429fb3000  ObjectTable: fffff8a0355b42e0  HandleCount:  58.
Image: WerFault.exe

PROCESS fffffa8053d853d0
SessionId: 2  Cid: 1fc4c    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 3d8b8
DirBase: 714371000  ObjectTable: fffff8a01cb6bba0  HandleCount:  58.
Image: WerFault.exe

Each process has only one thread running through WOW64 modules so we get its 32-bit stack trace:

0: kd> !process fffffa8075c21b30 ff
THREAD fffffa807c183b60 Cid 2d3c8.4334c Teb: 000000007efdb000 Win32Thread: fffff900c3f71010 WAIT: (UserRequest) UserMode Non-Alertable

0: kd> .load wow64exts

0: kd> .process /r /p fffffa8075c21b30
Implicit process is now fffffa80`75c21b30
Loading User Symbols
Loading Wow64 Symbols

0: kd> .thread /w fffffa807c183b60
Implicit thread is now fffffa80`7c183b60
x86 context set

0: kd:x86> k
*** Stack trace for last set context - .thread/.cxr resets it
ChildEBP          RetAddr
000bf474 77080bdd ntdll!ZwWaitForMultipleObjects+0x15
000bf510 76bb1a2c KERNELBASE!WaitForMultipleObjectsEx+0x100
000bf558 76bb4208 kernel32!WaitForMultipleObjectsExImplementation+0xe0
000bf574 76bd80a4 kernel32!WaitForMultipleObjects+0x18
000bf5e0 76bd7f63 kernel32!WerpReportFaultInternal+0x186
000bf5f4 76bd7858 kernel32!WerpReportFault+0x70
000bf604 76bd77d7 kernel32!BasepReportFault+0x20
000bf690 776674df kernel32!UnhandledExceptionFilter+0x1af
000bf698 776673bc ntdll!__RtlUserThreadStart+0x62
000bf6ac 77667261 ntdll!_EH4_CallFilterFunc+0x12
000bf6d4 7764b459 ntdll!_except_handler4+0x8e
000bf6f8 7764b42b ntdll!ExecuteHandler2+0x26
000bf71c 7764b3ce ntdll!ExecuteHandler+0x24
000bf7a8 77600133 ntdll!RtlDispatchException+0x127
000bf7b4 000bf7c0 ntdll!KiUserExceptionDispatcher+0xf
WARNING: Frame IP not in any known module. Following frames may be wrong.
000bfb00 77629ef2 0xbf7c0

We find exception processing and code on stack (return address belongs to stack range). This thread is waiting for another process and it is WerFault.exe too:

0: kd:x86> .effmach AMD64

0: kd> !process fffffa8075c21b30 ff
THREAD fffffa807c183b60 Cid 2d3c8.4334c Teb: 000000007efdb000 Win32Thread: fffff900c3f71010 WAIT: (UserRequest) UserMode Non-Alertable
fffffa80809c44e0 ProcessObject

0: kd> !process fffffa80809c44e0
PROCESS fffffa80809c44e0
SessionId: 2  Cid: 33844    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 2d3c8
DirBase: 9c53f0000  ObjectTable: fffff8a0423d4170  HandleCount: 978.
Image: WerFault.exe

We go back to our original WerFault process and in its PEB data we find it was called to report a fault from another process with PID 0n189240:

0: kd> !process fffffa8075c21b30 ff
CommandLine:  'C:\Windows\SysWOW64\WerFault.exe -u -p 189240 -s 3888′

And it’s WerFault.exe too:

0: kd> !process 0n189240
Searching for Process with Cid == 2e338

PROCESS fffffa8078b659e0
SessionId: 2  Cid: 2e338    Peb: 7efdf000  ParentCid: 47608
DirBase: 201796000  ObjectTable: fffff8a02e664380  HandleCount: 974.
Image: WerFault.exe

So we see a chain of WerFault.exe processes each processing a fault in the previous one. So there should be a first fault somewhere which we can find in stack trace collection (32-bit stack traces for this example) unless that exception stack trace was paged out due to insufficient memory occupied by WerFault.exe processes.

- Dmitry Vostokov @ + -

2 Responses to “Crash Dump Analysis Patterns (Part 182)”

  1. Marc Sherman Says:

    Very nice analysis! Curious though why you supply ff as flags to !process when it looks like all the documented flags are covered with 1f. Do you know about some undocumented flags or is it just faster to type ff ?

  2. Dmitry Vostokov Says:

    Thanks! I usee ff as it is easier to remember and faster to type and it covers all flags currently :-)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.