Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-9086

obd_config.c:1258:class_process_config()) no device for:

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Minor
    • Lustre 2.10.0
    • Lustre 2.10.0
    • None
    • CentOS 7.3
    • 3
    • 9223372036854775807

    Description

      Secure RPC rules are being ignored due to an issue introduced by commit 0308951e8bba1663bc9495eee2f6ae631e6bcbd0 for LU-9034. When mounting Lustre resources, clients and servers log the following messages when secure RPC rules are set:

      {{LustreError: 2696:0:(obd_config.c:1258:class_process_config()) no device for: lustre-ffff880078dd9e70
      Lustre: 2696:0:(obd_config.c:1311:class_process_config()) Ignoring error -22 on optional command 0xce016}}

      For my tests I set the following rules:
      lustre.srpc.flavor.tcp.cli2mdt=ski
      lustre.srpc.flavor.tcp.cli2ost=ski

      then:

      lustre.srpc.flavor.tcp.cli2mdt=krb5p
      lustre.srpc.flavor.tcp.cli2ost=krb5p

      All resources mount fine but cli2mdt and cli2ost connections aren't secured, they default to null.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            [LU-9086] obd_config.c:1258:class_process_config()) no device for:
            pjones Peter Jones added a comment -

            Landed for 2.10

            pjones Peter Jones added a comment - Landed for 2.10

            Oleg Drokin (oleg.drokin@intel.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/25959/
            Subject: LU-9086 gss: handle specific mgc binding
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set:
            Commit: 1b22b5141a22d471f70339320ea156c26db0ed37

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - Oleg Drokin (oleg.drokin@intel.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/25959/ Subject: LU-9086 gss: handle specific mgc binding Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: Commit: 1b22b5141a22d471f70339320ea156c26db0ed37

            [root@ninja11 live]# cat lustre
            fsname: lustre
            flags: 0x20 gen: 24
            lustre-MDT0000
            lustre-OST0000

            Secure RPC Config Rules:
            lustre.srpc.flavor.o2ib1.cli2mdt=skpi

            imperative_recovery_state:
            state: startup
            nonir_clients: 0
            nidtbl_version: 4
            notify_duration_total: 0.000527674
            notify_duation_max: 0.000306105
            notify_count: 2

            It lives!!!! Will push now.

            simmonsja James A Simmons added a comment - [root@ninja11 live] # cat lustre fsname: lustre flags: 0x20 gen: 24 lustre-MDT0000 lustre-OST0000 Secure RPC Config Rules: lustre.srpc.flavor.o2ib1.cli2mdt=skpi imperative_recovery_state: state: startup nonir_clients: 0 nidtbl_version: 4 notify_duration_total: 0.000527674 notify_duation_max: 0.000306105 notify_count: 2 It lives!!!! Will push now.

            It seems that sptlrpc rules are per filesystem. Setting a rule on one MGT affects the client's connection(s) to the other filesystem named 'lustre':

             

            client# lctl get_param ..srpc_* | grep -A2 mdc.lustre
            mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007884d800.srpc_info=
            rpc flavor: null
            bulk flavor: null

            mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007a334000.srpc_info=
            rpc flavor: null
            bulk flavor: null

            mgs1# lctl conf_param lustre.srpc.flavor.default.cli2mdt=krb5p

            client# lctl get_param ..srpc_* | grep -A2 mdc.lustre
            mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007884d800.srpc_info=
            rpc flavor: krb5p
            bulk flavor: krb5p

            mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007a334000.srpc_info=
            rpc flavor: krb5p
            bulk flavor: krb5p

             

            This test was conducted with Lustre v.2.9.0

            nblavend Nathan Lavender (Inactive) added a comment - It seems that sptlrpc rules are per filesystem. Setting a rule on one MGT affects the client's connection(s) to the other filesystem named 'lustre':   client# lctl get_param . .srpc_* | grep -A2 mdc.lustre mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007884d800.srpc_info= rpc flavor: null bulk flavor: null – mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007a334000.srpc_info= rpc flavor: null bulk flavor: null mgs1# lctl conf_param lustre.srpc.flavor.default.cli2mdt=krb5p client# lctl get_param . .srpc_* | grep -A2 mdc.lustre mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007884d800.srpc_info= rpc flavor: krb5p bulk flavor: krb5p – mdc.lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff88007a334000.srpc_info= rpc flavor: krb5p bulk flavor: krb5p   This test was conducted with Lustre v.2.9.0

            So the question is now are the sptlrpc configurations per filesystem or per obd device. John asked the question about the case if we have two MGTs each with a filesystem named 'lustre' (and the client mounts both).

            simmonsja James A Simmons added a comment - So the question is now are the sptlrpc configurations per filesystem or per obd device. John asked the question about the case if we have two MGTs each with a filesystem named 'lustre' (and the client mounts both).

            krb5p_multinode_llmount.tgz

            The following error is logged multiple times on each of the nodes:

            mgc_request.c:2143:mgc_process_log()) MGC172.18.0.18@tcp: configuration from log 'lustre-sptlrpc' failed (-2).

             

            when SEC=krb5p and executing llmount.sh. Perhaps these logs will provide some clues as to why the rules are being ignored.

            nblavend Nathan Lavender (Inactive) added a comment - krb5p_multinode_llmount.tgz The following error is logged multiple times on each of the nodes: mgc_request.c:2143:mgc_process_log()) MGC172.18.0.18@tcp: configuration from log 'lustre-sptlrpc' failed (-2).   when SEC=krb5p and executing llmount.sh. Perhaps these logs will provide some clues as to why the rules are being ignored.

            The patch appears to fix this problem. Have you tried it?

            simmonsja James A Simmons added a comment - The patch appears to fix this problem. Have you tried it?

            James Simmons (uja.ornl@yahoo.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/25959
            Subject: LU-9086 gss: handle specific mgc binding
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set: 1
            Commit: 4fc1de3721191d30658ef8f1830bae3a982a06f7

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - James Simmons (uja.ornl@yahoo.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/25959 Subject: LU-9086 gss: handle specific mgc binding Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: 1 Commit: 4fc1de3721191d30658ef8f1830bae3a982a06f7

            This bug is preventing me for fixing LU-9073

            simmonsja James A Simmons added a comment - This bug is preventing me for fixing LU-9073

            People

              simmonsja James A Simmons
              nblavend Nathan Lavender (Inactive)
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              5 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: