[LU-1060] Test failure on test suite replay-vbr, subtest test_7c

• Type: Bug
• Resolution: Duplicate
• Priority: Blocker
• Fix Version/s: Lustre 2.2.0
• Affects Version/s: Lustre 2.2.0, Lustre 2.1.1
• Severity: 3
• Assignee: nasf (Inactive)
• Reporter: Maloo

Description

This issue was created by maloo for sarah <[e-mail]>

This issue relates to the following test suite run: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/c95fc5c2-4c42-11e1-bd50-5254004bbbd3.

The sub-test test_7c failed with the following error:

Test 7c.2 failed

Info required for matching: replay-vbr 7c

Issue Links

• is related to: LU-966 post-fsck MDS LBUG during recovery due to missing FID
• Trackbacks: Lustre 2.1.1 release testing tracker Lustre 2.1.1 RC2 Tag: v2110RC2 Build:
• Trackbacks: Changelog 2.2 version 2.2.0 Support for networks: o2iblnd OFED 1.5.4 Server support for kernels: 2.6.32220.4.2.el6 (RHEL6) Client support for unpatched kernels: 2.6.18274.18.1.el5 (RHEL5) 2.6.32220.4.2.el6 (RHEL6) 2.6.32.360....

Comments

[Peter Jones]

duplicate of lu-966

[Zhenyu Xu]

the patch to let vbr version check replay non-exist object is posted at http://review.whamcloud.com/2149

description: For replay cases, mdt_version_get_check will check non-exist mdt object and evict clients accordingly, but mdt_object_find will not set exp_vbr_failed and will not evict the faulty client.

[nasf (Inactive)]

Removing the patch for LU-966 directly may be not the best solution. If you do not like my patch for LU-1060, we can fix it case by case. I think Bobijam is working on such patch to erase the side-effect of his LU-966 patch.

[Mikhail Pershin]

Right, your patch will work to cover some case but it is just fast fix to hide bad effects of previous wrong patch, that is the way we shouldn't go for sure. It hides side-effects but doesn't fix the root cause, moreover it doesn't fix broken VBR which can cause unneeded evictions after LU-966. The right way will be step back to the point where all issues appeared - LU-966.

Basically we need to revert that patch and apply its first version - just replace assertions with error checks, it straight-forward and easy to follow. The idea to make that early in MDT was wrong and we missed that, any further attempts to fix that in MDT will cause more complexity there and more checks. I've made patch already:
http://review.whamcloud.com/#change,2148

Another my worry is about test set for master review testing, I don't get why it misses replay-vbr and runtests which are pretty good tests. LU-1060 appeared right after LU-966 landing and nobody noticed that. This is out of scope this bug though.

[Mikhail Pershin]

LU-1060 is caused by LU-966 improper fix.

[nasf (Inactive)]

Right, so to erase the side-affect of LU-966 patch, my patch works well. Otherwise, we have to fix up all related points one by one, and if someone add new points in the future, he/she has to consider again.

So, what's your idea?

[Mikhail Pershin]

this is result of LU-966 patch, unfortunately nobody noticed it ruins VBR recovery because mdt_object_find() may exits early without any VBR checking.