Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-1938

Operational incompatibility - RHEL6.2, kernel-2.6.32-279.2.1.el6_x86_64, MLNX_OFED-1.5.3-3.1.0

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Not a Bug
    • Major
    • None
    • Lustre 2.1.3
    • None
    • 3
    • 10076

    Description

      Newly deployed filesystem. Running initial test rsync from client to filesystem when rsync process hung.

      Also see other weirdness. Poor performance. Network errors (example below).


      Lustre: 16691:0:(client.c:1780:ptlrpc_expire_one_request()) @@@ Request sent has failed due to network error: [sent 1347583367/real 1347583367] req@ffff880664530c00 x1413043208599797/t0(0) o8->alicefs-OST0006-osc-ffff880832436000@172.20.2.125@o2ib:28/4 lens 368/512 e 0 to 1 dl 1347583422 ref 1 fl Rpc:XN/0/ffffffff rc 0/-1
      Lustre: 16691:0:(client.c:1780:ptlrpc_expire_one_request()) Skipped 5 previous similar messages
      Lustre: 16691:0:(client.c:1780:ptlrpc_expire_one_request()) @@@ Request sent has failed due to network error: [sent 1347583517/real 1347583517] req@ffff8808329b1800 x1413043208681668/t0(0) o8->alicefs-OST0006-osc-ffff880832436000@172.20.2.125@o2ib:28/4 lens 368/512 e 0 to 1 dl 1347583572 ref 1 fl Rpc:XN/0/ffffffff rc 0/-1
      Lustre: 16691:0:(client.c:1780:ptlrpc_expire_one_request()) Skipped 11 previous similar messages


      INFO: task rsync:16826 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
      "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
      rsync D 0000000000000002 0 16826 1 0x00000080
      ffff8803df615978 0000000000000046 0000000000000000 ffff88043343bca0
      ffff8808340ecb58 ffff880833270b40 ffff88043343bd38 ffff8803df615938
      ffff88043405b058 ffff8803df615fd8 000000000000fb88 ffff88043405b058
      Call Trace:
      [<ffffffffa04c067e>] cfs_waitq_wait+0xe/0x10 [libcfs]
      [<ffffffffa0a6c314>] lov_delete_raid0+0x2e4/0x400 [lov]
      [<ffffffffa0a6b816>] lov_object_delete+0x66/0x190 [lov]
      [<ffffffffa05e2d29>] lu_object_free+0x89/0x1b0 [obdclass]
      [<ffffffffa04ce894>] ? cfs_hash_dual_bd_unlock+0x34/0x60 [libcfs]
      [<ffffffffa04cf052>] ? cfs_hash_bd_from_key+0x42/0xe0 [libcfs]
      [<ffffffffa05e300f>] lu_object_put+0x1bf/0x290 [obdclass]
      [<ffffffffa0b4c312>] ? cl_inode_fini+0x52/0x270 [lustre]
      [<ffffffffa05e9a1e>] cl_object_put+0xe/0x10 [obdclass]
      [<ffffffffa0b4c34a>] cl_inode_fini+0x8a/0x270 [lustre]
      [<ffffffffa0c1cbec>] ? lmv_change_cbdata+0x2cc/0x580 [lmv]
      [<ffffffffa0b1c42f>] ll_clear_inode+0x2ff/0xdb0 [lustre]
      [<ffffffff81195c0c>] clear_inode+0xac/0x140
      [<ffffffffa0b1747b>] ll_delete_inode+0x18b/0x650 [lustre]
      [<ffffffffa0b172f0>] ? ll_delete_inode+0x0/0x650 [lustre]
      [<ffffffff8119630e>] generic_delete_inode+0xde/0x1d0
      [<ffffffff81196465>] generic_drop_inode+0x65/0x80
      [<ffffffff811952b2>] iput+0x62/0x70
      [<ffffffffa0af38d1>] ll_d_iput+0x31/0x80 [lustre]
      [<ffffffff81191dfc>] dentry_iput+0x7c/0x100
      [<ffffffff81191f71>] d_kill+0x31/0x60
      [<ffffffff8119399c>] dput+0x7c/0x150
      [<ffffffff8117caf9>] __fput+0x189/0x210
      [<ffffffff8117cba5>] fput+0x25/0x30
      [<ffffffff811785cd>] filp_close+0x5d/0x90
      [<ffffffff8106e3bf>] put_files_struct+0x7f/0xf0
      [<ffffffff8106e483>] exit_files+0x53/0x70
      [<ffffffff810704fd>] do_exit+0x18d/0x870
      [<ffffffff810d6b12>] ? audit_syscall_entry+0x272/0x2a0
      [<ffffffff81070c38>] do_group_exit+0x58/0xd0
      [<ffffffff81070cc7>] sys_exit_group+0x17/0x20
      [<ffffffff8100b0f2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
      INFO: task rsync:16826 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
      "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
      rsync D 0000000000000002 0 16826 1 0x00000080
      ffff8803df615978 0000000000000046 0000000000000000 ffff88043343bca0
      ffff8808340ecb58 ffff880833270b40 ffff88043343bd38 ffff8803df615938
      ffff88043405b058 ffff8803df615fd8 000000000000fb88 ffff88043405b058
      Call Trace:
      [<ffffffffa04c067e>] cfs_waitq_wait+0xe/0x10 [libcfs]
      [<ffffffffa0a6c314>] lov_delete_raid0+0x2e4/0x400 [lov]
      [<ffffffffa0a6b816>] lov_object_delete+0x66/0x190 [lov]
      [<ffffffffa05e2d29>] lu_object_free+0x89/0x1b0 [obdclass]
      [<ffffffffa04ce894>] ? cfs_hash_dual_bd_unlock+0x34/0x60 [libcfs]
      [<ffffffffa04cf052>] ? cfs_hash_bd_from_key+0x42/0xe0 [libcfs]
      [<ffffffffa05e300f>] lu_object_put+0x1bf/0x290 [obdclass]
      [<ffffffffa0b4c312>] ? cl_inode_fini+0x52/0x270 [lustre]
      [<ffffffffa05e9a1e>] cl_object_put+0xe/0x10 [obdclass]
      [<ffffffffa0b4c34a>] cl_inode_fini+0x8a/0x270 [lustre]
      [<ffffffffa0c1cbec>] ? lmv_change_cbdata+0x2cc/0x580 [lmv]
      [<ffffffffa0b1c42f>] ll_clear_inode+0x2ff/0xdb0 [lustre]
      [<ffffffff81195c0c>] clear_inode+0xac/0x140
      [<ffffffffa0b1747b>] ll_delete_inode+0x18b/0x650 [lustre]
      [<ffffffffa0b172f0>] ? ll_delete_inode+0x0/0x650 [lustre]
      [<ffffffff8119630e>] generic_delete_inode+0xde/0x1d0
      [<ffffffff81196465>] generic_drop_inode+0x65/0x80
      [<ffffffff811952b2>] iput+0x62/0x70
      [<ffffffffa0af38d1>] ll_d_iput+0x31/0x80 [lustre]
      [<ffffffff81191dfc>] dentry_iput+0x7c/0x100
      [<ffffffff81191f71>] d_kill+0x31/0x60
      [<ffffffff8119399c>] dput+0x7c/0x150
      [<ffffffff8117caf9>] __fput+0x189/0x210
      [<ffffffff8117cba5>] fput+0x25/0x30
      [<ffffffff811785cd>] filp_close+0x5d/0x90
      [<ffffffff8106e3bf>] put_files_struct+0x7f/0xf0
      [<ffffffff8106e483>] exit_files+0x53/0x70
      [<ffffffff810704fd>] do_exit+0x18d/0x870
      [<ffffffff810d6b12>] ? audit_syscall_entry+0x272/0x2a0
      [<ffffffff81070c38>] do_group_exit+0x58/0xd0
      [<ffffffff81070cc7>] sys_exit_group+0x17/0x20
      [<ffffffff8100b0f2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

      Attachments

        Activity

          [LU-1938] Operational incompatibility - RHEL6.2, kernel-2.6.32-279.2.1.el6_x86_64, MLNX_OFED-1.5.3-3.1.0

          Looks like this issue has been resolved and no further action is required.
          Thanks,
          ~ jfc.

          jfc John Fuchs-Chesney (Inactive) added a comment - Looks like this issue has been resolved and no further action is required. Thanks, ~ jfc.

          It could be hard to find out which official OFED version a RHEL kernel was based on. The kernel merge windows and OFED release cycles don't often match and very often Redhat would backport fixes from newer versions of OFED. I think it's a good idea for clients and servers to at least use IB stacks from a same source, e.g. Open Fabrics or Mellanox or Redhat - there's at least change logs to look for differences.

          isaac Isaac Huang (Inactive) added a comment - It could be hard to find out which official OFED version a RHEL kernel was based on. The kernel merge windows and OFED release cycles don't often match and very often Redhat would backport fixes from newer versions of OFED. I think it's a good idea for clients and servers to at least use IB stacks from a same source, e.g. Open Fabrics or Mellanox or Redhat - there's at least change logs to look for differences.

          Doug, I recompiled Lustre 2.1.3 source against Mellanox OFED 1.5.3-3.1.0. With the server and client side running the same IB stack it appears there are no problems.

          I had seen this once before in RHEL5.5, Lustre 1.8.4 where the client/cluster side ran OFED and the Lustre server side ran RHEL's in-kernel IB and the lnet communication was dysfunctional. As we know, standards aren't really that standard.

          I am going to test this on our in-house cluster when I get back to the US. I think there is a lingering incompatibility between RHEL's IB and clients running OFED. I will pass my findings along to WC.

          Since OFED is so popular on the cluster node side of the equation perhaps WC might consider doing an OFED variant of the precompiled Lustre packages. Just a thought.

          aeonjeffj Jeff Johnson (Inactive) added a comment - Doug, I recompiled Lustre 2.1.3 source against Mellanox OFED 1.5.3-3.1.0. With the server and client side running the same IB stack it appears there are no problems. I had seen this once before in RHEL5.5, Lustre 1.8.4 where the client/cluster side ran OFED and the Lustre server side ran RHEL's in-kernel IB and the lnet communication was dysfunctional. As we know, standards aren't really that standard. I am going to test this on our in-house cluster when I get back to the US. I think there is a lingering incompatibility between RHEL's IB and clients running OFED. I will pass my findings along to WC. Since OFED is so popular on the cluster node side of the equation perhaps WC might consider doing an OFED variant of the precompiled Lustre packages. Just a thought.

          Jeff: did you get a chance to verify if rsync and dd are now working?

          doug Doug Oucharek (Inactive) added a comment - Jeff: did you get a chance to verify if rsync and dd are now working?

          It looked like the rebuild address the IB issues (lent_selftest works fine). Outstanding issues: rsync hangs after a few seconds and standard df hangs (but lfs df works).

          doug Doug Oucharek (Inactive) added a comment - It looked like the rebuild address the IB issues (lent_selftest works fine). Outstanding issues: rsync hangs after a few seconds and standard df hangs (but lfs df works).

          I have rebuild the server side rpms against the same Mellanox OFED release used on the client side. I will have the filesystem up in a few minutes and will report outcome.

          Kernel: 2.6.32-279.2.1.el6_lustre.gc46c389.x86_64
          OFED: MLNX_OFED_LINUX-1.5.3-3.1.0-rhel6.3-x86_6
          Lustre source: lustre-2.1.3-2.6.32_279.2.1.el6_lustre.gc46c389.x86_64.src.rpm

          aeonjeffj Jeff Johnson (Inactive) added a comment - I have rebuild the server side rpms against the same Mellanox OFED release used on the client side. I will have the filesystem up in a few minutes and will report outcome. Kernel: 2.6.32-279.2.1.el6_lustre.gc46c389.x86_64 OFED: MLNX_OFED_LINUX-1.5.3-3.1.0-rhel6.3-x86_6 Lustre source: lustre-2.1.3-2.6.32_279.2.1.el6_lustre.gc46c389.x86_64.src.rpm
          pjones Peter Jones added a comment -

          Doug will help with this one

          pjones Peter Jones added a comment - Doug will help with this one

          Is it necessary to run the same IB stack on client and server nodes? Server side is currently running RHEL 6.2 in kernel IB. Clients are running MLNX_OFED-1.5.3-3.1.0

          aeonjeffj Jeff Johnson (Inactive) added a comment - Is it necessary to run the same IB stack on client and server nodes? Server side is currently running RHEL 6.2 in kernel IB. Clients are running MLNX_OFED-1.5.3-3.1.0

          People

            doug Doug Oucharek (Inactive)
            aeonjeffj Jeff Johnson (Inactive)
            Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            5 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: