Details

    • Improvement
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Minor
    • None
    • Lustre 2.12.0, Lustre 2.10.5
    • None
    • Any lustre system using IB for LNet
    • 3
    • 9223372036854775807

    Description

      While porting the map_on_demand changes to the linux lustre client it was noticed that the cleanup for the FMR / FastReg pool handling was wrong. Even when using FMR if the fmr pool is already deleted it will attempt to cleanup the FastReg pool which shouldn't even exist.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            [LU-11552] improper FMR/FastReg pool cleanup

            Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/33802/
            Subject: Revert "LU-11152 lnd: test fpo_fmr_poool pointer instead of special bool"
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set:
            Commit: a65d072fa45fc90c2fc74b61d214de79c0bf33e5

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/33802/ Subject: Revert " LU-11152 lnd: test fpo_fmr_poool pointer instead of special bool" Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: Commit: a65d072fa45fc90c2fc74b61d214de79c0bf33e5

            Amir Shehata (ashehata@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/33802
            Subject: Revert "LU-11152 lnd: test fpo_fmr_poool pointer instead of special bool"
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set: 1
            Commit: b169980b805b78df9b05e10079d27c4a6d3dbbc1

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - Amir Shehata (ashehata@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/33802 Subject: Revert " LU-11152 lnd: test fpo_fmr_poool pointer instead of special bool" Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: 1 Commit: b169980b805b78df9b05e10079d27c4a6d3dbbc1
            spitzcor Cory Spitz added a comment - - edited

            I'm reopening this issue due to the mix-up described at comment-260120. There was a typo in the commit header.

            Even though code landed for this ticket, it was later reverted because it introduced LU-11735 (comment-238218) and so we need to re-open this ticket accordingly.

            spitzcor Cory Spitz added a comment - - edited I'm reopening this issue due to the mix-up described at comment-260120 . There was a typo in the commit header. Even though code landed for this ticket, it was later reverted because it introduced LU-11735 ( comment-238218 ) and so we need to re-open this ticket accordingly.

            Just to clarify, while the patch cleans up the code. There was no bug.

            ashehata Amir Shehata (Inactive) added a comment - Just to clarify, while the patch cleans up the code. There was no bug.

            Patch at https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/33408. Fixed the LU number.

            simmonsja James A Simmons added a comment - Patch at https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/33408.  Fixed the LU number.

            People

              simmonsja James A Simmons
              simmonsja James A Simmons
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              5 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated: