Details
-
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Critical
-
None
-
None
-
-
3
-
12838
Description
While compiling e2fsprogs against Lustre master branch on RHEL6.5/ppc64, I hit the following errors:
In file included from /root/lustre-release/build/lustre-2.5.56//lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h:51,
from /root/lustre-release/build/lustre-2.5.56//lustre/include/lustre/lustreapi.h:46,
from ../lib/ext2fs/lfsck.h:10,
from lfsck_common.c:29:
/root/lustre-release/build/lustre-2.5.56//libcfs/include/libcfs/posix/posix-types.h:48: error: conflicting types for 'umode_t'
/usr/include/asm/types.h:31: note: previous declaration of 'umode_t' was here
CC util.c
In file included from /root/lustre-release/build/lustre-2.5.56//lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h:51,
from /root/lustre-release/build/lustre-2.5.56//lustre/include/lustre/lustreapi.h:46,
from ../lib/ext2fs/lfsck.h:10,
from lfsck.c:80:
/root/lustre-release/build/lustre-2.5.56//libcfs/include/libcfs/posix/posix-types.h:48: error: conflicting types for 'umode_t'
/usr/include/asm/types.h:31: note: previous declaration of 'umode_t' was here
make[3]: *** [lfsck_common.o] Error 1
The build log "build_e2fsprogs.ppc64.log" is attached.
Attachments
Issue Links
- is related to
-
-
- Closed
-
Activity
About the patch for PAGE_SIZE, I think the tests should be improved. Here are the files in the test image for f_eofblocks:
# ls -ail /mnt/mds1 total 75K 2 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 1.0K Apr 11 2012 ./ 8199 drwxr-xr-x. 115 root root 4.0K Dec 31 01:17 ../ 12 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.0K Apr 11 2012 a1 13 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.0K Apr 11 2012 a2 14 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.0K Apr 11 2012 b1 15 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.0K Apr 11 2012 b2 16 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 c1 17 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 c2 18 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 d1 19 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 d2 20 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 e1 21 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 e2 22 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.0K Apr 11 2012 f1 23 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.0K Apr 11 2012 f2 24 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4.0K Apr 11 2012 g1 25 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4.0K Apr 11 2012 g2 26 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4.0K Apr 11 2012 h1 27 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4.0K Apr 11 2012 h2 28 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Apr 11 2012 i1 29 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Apr 11 2012 i2 30 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 j1 31 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0K Apr 11 2012 j2 11 drwx------ 2 root root 12K Apr 11 2012 lost+found/ root@RHEL6:/tmp/ # stat /mnt/mds1/j1 File: `/mnt/mds1/j1' Size: 2048 Blocks: 8 IO Block: 1024 regular file Device: 700h/1792d Inode: 30 Links: 1 Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--) Uid: ( 0/ root) Gid: ( 0/ root) Access: 2012-04-11 11:26:25.000000000 +0800 Modify: 2012-04-11 11:29:47.000000000 +0800 Change: 2012-04-11 11:29:47.000000000 +0800 root@RHEL6:/tmp/ # stat /mnt/mds1/j2 File: `/mnt/mds1/j2' Size: 2048 Blocks: 12 IO Block: 1024 regular file Device: 700h/1792d Inode: 31 Links: 1 Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--) Uid: ( 0/ root) Gid: ( 0/ root) Access: 2012-04-11 11:26:30.000000000 +0800 Modify: 2012-04-11 11:29:50.000000000 +0800 Change: 2012-04-11 11:29:50.000000000 +0800
For the server with 4KB PAGE_SIZE, such as x86_64, the "j1" case is acceptable, but for other large PAGE_SIZE cases, such as 64KB on PPC64, "Blocks: 8" should be for "truncate" case, so the size for "j1" should be 512 * 8 = 4096, but not the showed 2048.
To make the tests to be workable for difference arch, the file "j1" should be removed from the test image.
Looking at the e2fsprogs code, it seems that there is almost no code using ext2_dir_entry_2, it all uses ext2_dir_entry and then masks name_len and shifts down file_type. Unfortunately, in the e2fsprogs code, the in-memory representation of the directory entry is often already swabbed, so the change to ext2_dir_entry_2 would break for entries that are already swabbed.
I think it would be better to update the Lustre patches to use ext2_dir_entry and use the mask-and-shift method used by the rest of the code. Since I'm already updating the e2fsprogs patches to the latest maint release, I will do this part. I'm not sure what is wrong with the PAGE_SIZE patches or others since I don't know why they are failing.
By using the following temporary fix suggested by nasf, the number of failed tests was reduced from 37 to 3 (f_eofblocks, f_pgsize_gt_blksize, f_dirdata):
diff --git a/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h b/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h
index a99ab37..95233ba 100644
--- a/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h
+++ b/lib/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h
@@ -785,11 +785,16 @@ struct ext2_dir_entry {
* file_type field.
*/
struct ext2_dir_entry_2 {
- __u32 inode; /* Inode number */
- __u16 rec_len; /* Directory entry length */
- __u8 name_len; /* Name length */
- __u8 file_type;
- char name[EXT2_NAME_LEN]; /* File name */
+ __u32 inode; /* Inode number */
+ __u16 rec_len; /* Directory entry length */
+#ifndef WORDS_BIGENDIAN
+ __u8 name_len; /* Name length */
+ __u8 file_type;
+#else
+ __u8 file_type;
+ __u8 name_len; /* Name length */
+#endif
+ char name[EXT2_NAME_LEN]; /* File name */
};
After temporarily disabling the 3 failed tests, I successfully built e2fsprogs on the ppc64 node and got the rpm packages.
I'll see what errors I'll hit while testing Lustre server codes on the ppc64 node. In the meantime, nasf will continue digging into the failures and find out more proper way to resolve those failures. Thanks, nasf!
It should be related with bytes order in the structure of "ext2_dirent_entry" and "ext2_dirent_entry_2" on the PPC64 machine.
struct ext4_dir_entry {
__le32 inode; /* Inode number */
__le16 rec_len; /* Directory entry length */
__le16 name_len; /* Name length */
char name[EXT4_NAME_LEN]; /* File name */
};
/*
* The new version of the directory entry. Since EXT4 structures are
* stored in intel byte order, and the name_len field could never be
* bigger than 255 chars, it's safe to reclaim the extra byte for the
* file_type field.
*/
struct ext4_dir_entry_2 {
__le32 inode; /* Inode number */
__le16 rec_len; /* Directory entry length */
__u8 name_len; /* Name length */
__u8 file_type;
char name[EXT4_NAME_LEN]; /* File name */
};
In fact, the ext4_dir_entry_2::name_len and ext4_dir_entry_2::file_type should be exchanged on PPC64 as following:
struct ext2_dir_entry_2 {
__le32 inode; /* Inode number */
__le16 rec_len; /* Directory entry length */
#ifndef WORDS_BIGENDIAN
__u8 name_len; /* Name length */
__u8 file_type;
#else
__u8 file_type;
__u8 name_len; /* Name length */
#endif
char name[EXT2_NAME_LEN]; /* File name */
};
Then we can access the ext2_dir_entry::name_len via ext2_dir_entry_2::name_len.
In fact, because the CPU bytes-order for PPC64 and the on-disk bytes-order are different, any value (not only ext2_dir_dirent, but also others, such as inode, super_block, and so on) which is larger than 1-byte and loaded from disk (write or disk) should be converted via lexx_to_cpu (or cpu_to_lexx). Unfortunately, we missed to do that at a lot of points in current implantation.
On the other hand, in current implementation, we assume the ext2_dir_entry_2::name_len is lower than ext2_dir_entry_2::file_type, so there are some logic like the following:
int filetype = dirent->name_len >> 8;
...
dirent->name_len = ((dirent->name_len & 0xFF) | (dirdata | should_be) << 8);
...
To make the e2fsck workable on PPC64 correctly, all related codes should be well checked and re-considere. In theory, it is not complex, but it involves a lot of trivial things and I am not sure whether there will be other data structures to be handled. We must check carefully one by one. So it is not a simple work.
I;ve added Fanyong to the list because he can provide expertise in this topic.
It is my guess that the base e2fsprogs (before the "Lustre version" patch will not have this problem.
Yes, Andreas, I verified this.
Here are the commits on e2fsprogs master-lustre branch: http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=tools/e2fsprogs.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/master-lustre
Since commit f6632828e4845041bce12f79d8f3aae095534bc6 (e2fsck: handle preallocation for large PAGE_SIZE), "make check" started failing on ppc64 node. And before that commit, "make check" passed.
Here are the details about which test failures on ppc64 node are introduced by which commits:
| Failed tests | Introduced by |
|---|---|
| f_eofblocks | e2fsck: handle preallocation for large PAGE_SIZE |
| f_pgsize_gt_blksize | tests: PAGE_SIZE larger than blocksize with hole |
| f_badsymlinks f_dup_de2 f_dup_de f_ext_journal f_h_badnode f_h_badroot f_h_reindex f_jchksum_remount f_rehash_dir f_uninit_bad_free_inodes f_uninit_blk_used_not_set f_uninit_set_inode_not_set f_zero_group f_zero_super | e2fsck: add support for dir_data feature |
| f_dirdata | tests: add basic tests for dir_data feature |
| f_dirdata_optimize f_dir_optimize | |
| f_random_corruption | debugfs: dump "fid" and "lma" xattrs on inode stat |
| s_basic_scan | tests: add basic test case for e2scan |
| d_loaddump d_special_files f_badroot f_badtable f_dup4 f_dupdot f_dup_resize f_expand f_illitable f_lpf f_lpffile f_noroot f_recnect_bad f_reconnect m_no_opt t_quota_1on |
Could you and Jinshan please give me some instructions about how to make Lustre e2fsprogs codes pass building on ppc64 node without affecting the testing for LU-4665? Should I look into the above test failures and resolve them? Thanks a lot in advance.
Note that we have probably never compiled the Lustre-patches e2fsprogs code on PPC. When I was suggesting to bisect the code, I was thinking about the patches that we apply on top of the base e2fsprogs. It is my guess that the base e2fsprogs (before the "Lustre version" patch will not have this problem.
I can work with Yujian on this - do you have a rough idea about what was the latest working version?
This is fixed in the latest e2fsprogs release.