Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Minor
    • Lustre 2.13.0, Lustre 2.12.4
    • Lustre 2.12.2, Lustre 2.12.3
    • None
    • 3
    • 9223372036854775807

    Description

      == sanity test complete, duration 31 sec ============================================================= 14:20:26 (1548926426)
      rm: cannot remove '/mnt/lustre/d60g.sanity': Directory not empty
      sanity : @@@@@@ FAIL: remove sub-test dirs failed

      this is because 60g left d60g.sanity in inconsistent state:
      striped directory creation failed to create one stripe, then failed to remove direntry (due to same OBD_FAIL_OSD_TXN_START).
      when final rmdir fails to load inode with:
      LustreError: 25350:0:(llite_lib.c:2414:ll_prep_inode()) new_inode -fatal: rc -2

      I'm not sure what would be a correct approach here as in the fields we'd suggest to run LFSCK. probably we should use something like lctl rmdir .. to cleanup after 60g?

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            [LU-11907] sanity fails to cleanup d60g.sanity

            Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/36939/
            Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: b2_12
            Current Patch Set:
            Commit: 5b1ea58c21edd17c2cb1f4ecdbbeb5bbdaa1444b

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/36939/ Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: b2_12 Current Patch Set: Commit: 5b1ea58c21edd17c2cb1f4ecdbbeb5bbdaa1444b

            Minh Diep (mdiep@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/36939
            Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: b2_12
            Current Patch Set: 1
            Commit: a7ddb9c9e20a1593b46fd16862c4bfaea66c0f41

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - Minh Diep (mdiep@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/36939 Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: b2_12 Current Patch Set: 1 Commit: a7ddb9c9e20a1593b46fd16862c4bfaea66c0f41
            pjones Peter Jones added a comment -

            Landed for 2.13

            pjones Peter Jones added a comment - Landed for 2.13

            Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/34750/
            Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set:
            Commit: d2725563e7afa17a41a53aa65255a31380606d23

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/34750/ Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: Commit: d2725563e7afa17a41a53aa65255a31380606d23

            Lai Siyao (lai.siyao@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/34750
            Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set: 1
            Commit: 1717d19d1eefd6be6dcc78ea55283ceccc68e920

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - Lai Siyao (lai.siyao@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/34750 Subject: LU-11907 dne: allow access to striped dir with broken layout Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: 1 Commit: 1717d19d1eefd6be6dcc78ea55283ceccc68e920
            laisiyao Lai Siyao added a comment -

            Yes, I agree. After we support access to directories with missing stripes, migrate such directory will be similar to migrate directory with bad hash.

            laisiyao Lai Siyao added a comment - Yes, I agree. After we support access to directories with missing stripes, migrate such directory will be similar to migrate directory with bad hash.

            Yes, being able to read/unlink directories with missing stripes is very useful. We can't allow new files to be created therein, but we might consider to allow the entries to be migrated to another MDT (probably as a separate patch, if it is more complex than just allowing read/unlink). 

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - Yes, being able to read/unlink directories with missing stripes is very useful. We can't allow new files to be created therein, but we might consider to allow the entries to be migrated to another MDT (probably as a separate patch, if it is more complex than just allowing read/unlink). 

            right, I think this is a special case. I actually doubt such an outcome was designed. though another concern is that the test leaves the filesystem inconsistent and if we begin to run fsck/lfsck at some point (iirc, we discussed this possibility) then that would report an error.
            another thought was that it's probably OK to let users to access/remove striped directories with missing stripes? currently this is impossible, AFAIU.

            bzzz Alex Zhuravlev added a comment - right, I think this is a special case. I actually doubt such an outcome was designed. though another concern is that the test leaves the filesystem inconsistent and if we begin to run fsck/lfsck at some point (iirc, we discussed this possibility) then that would report an error. another thought was that it's probably OK to let users to access/remove striped directories with missing stripes? currently this is impossible, AFAIU.

            While fixing this with LFSCK should hopefully work, it is probably my least-preferred option, next least preferred option is using "lfs rmentry" (or whatever it is called).  

            The reason I don't like those is because this isn't what users will use, and they may not even know they exist. They will use "rmdir" or "rm -r", and that should work. The main reason we added "lfs rmentry" is to allow deleting entries on a remote MDT when the MDT is permanently lost. Normally, we don't want to allow a user to delete a remote directory when the MDT is just temporarily offline, because it may be full of files. 

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - While fixing this with LFSCK should hopefully work, it is probably my least-preferred option, next least preferred option is using "lfs rmentry" (or whatever it is called).   The reason I don't like those is because this isn't what users will use, and they may not even know they exist. They will use "rmdir" or "rm -r", and that should work. The main reason we added "lfs rmentry" is to allow deleting entries on a remote MDT when the MDT is permanently lost. Normally, we don't want to allow a user to delete a remote directory when the MDT is just temporarily offline, because it may be full of files. 

            People

              laisiyao Lai Siyao
              bzzz Alex Zhuravlev
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              6 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: