Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-5571

Test failure sanity-lfsck test_13: (2) unexpected status

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Cannot Reproduce
    • Critical
    • None
    • Lustre 2.7.0
    • None
    • 3
    • 15540

    Description

      This issue was created by maloo for Nathaniel Clark <nathaniel.l.clark@intel.com>

      This issue relates to the following test suite run:
      https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/c07fa6c6-189a-11e4-bd79-5254006e85c2
      https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/fe33929a-2fe0-11e4-957a-5254006e85c2
      https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/fe22e280-3146-11e4-b503-5254006e85c2
      https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/199c6a08-31d9-11e4-a833-5254006e85c2

      The sub-test test_13 failed with the following error:

      (2) unexpected status

      Info required for matching: sanity-lfsck 13

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            [LU-5571] Test failure sanity-lfsck test_13: (2) unexpected status

            The sanity-lfsck failures for DNE are not the same. The original test_13 failed because the low layer iteration was too slow to complete the LFSCK in time. The general behavior is that the final status was "scanning-phase2", but not the expected "completed".

            The failures for the DNE patches were that the test scripts cannot find the specified lproc interface "error: get_param: mdd/lustre-MDT0000/lfsck_layout: Found no match". I am still not sure what caused such failure, but it should not be related with the iteration performance.

            yong.fan nasf (Inactive) added a comment - The sanity-lfsck failures for DNE are not the same. The original test_13 failed because the low layer iteration was too slow to complete the LFSCK in time. The general behavior is that the final status was "scanning-phase2", but not the expected "completed". The failures for the DNE patches were that the test scripts cannot find the specified lproc interface "error: get_param: mdd/lustre-MDT0000/lfsck_layout: Found no match". I am still not sure what caused such failure, but it should not be related with the iteration performance.

            There are a large number of these failures being generated by the LU-3534 patch series, in particular:

            http://review.whamcloud.com/10794
            http://review.whamcloud.com/10939

            but I'm tracking those under LU-3534 instead of this ticket, which may not be related.

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - There are a large number of these failures being generated by the LU-3534 patch series, in particular: http://review.whamcloud.com/10794 http://review.whamcloud.com/10939 but I'm tracking those under LU-3534 instead of this ticket, which may not be related.

            Close it since it is cannot be reproduced after the patch applied.

            yong.fan nasf (Inactive) added a comment - Close it since it is cannot be reproduced after the patch applied.

            I cannot reproduce with 10987 applied and I don't see any failures on builds that include the patch (10987).

            utopiabound Nathaniel Clark added a comment - I cannot reproduce with 10987 applied and I don't see any failures on builds that include the patch (10987).

            Nathaniel,
            Could you run the test with this patch applied to see if it corrects the issue?
            Thank you!

            jlevi Jodi Levi (Inactive) added a comment - Nathaniel, Could you run the test with this patch applied to see if it corrects the issue? Thank you!

            The zfs-based backend seems some slow. I have changed the test scripts (in the patch http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/10987/ set 16) to wait more long time for the LFSCK status changing. Let's see what will happen after such patch applied.

            yong.fan nasf (Inactive) added a comment - The zfs-based backend seems some slow. I have changed the test scripts (in the patch http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/10987/ set 16) to wait more long time for the LFSCK status changing. Let's see what will happen after such patch applied.

            Fan Yong,
            Can you comment on this one please?
            Thank you!

            jlevi Jodi Levi (Inactive) added a comment - Fan Yong, Can you comment on this one please? Thank you!

            People

              yong.fan nasf (Inactive)
              maloo Maloo
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              5 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: