[LU-1526] interop 1.8,2.1 -> 2.4 "mkfs.lustre FATAL: The target index must be specified with --index" Created: 15/Jun/12 Updated: 28/Oct/14 Resolved: 17/Jan/13 |
|
| Status: | Resolved |
| Project: | Lustre |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | Lustre 2.4.0, Lustre 2.1.3, Lustre 2.1.4, Lustre 1.8.8 |
| Fix Version/s: | Lustre 2.4.0, Lustre 2.1.4, Lustre 1.8.9 |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Blocker |
| Reporter: | Maloo | Assignee: | Jian Yu |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | MB | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Severity: | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank (Obsolete): | 5602 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
This issue was created by maloo for Andreas Dilger <adilger@whamcloud.com> This issue relates to the following test suite run: The sub-test lustre-initialization_1 failed with the following error:
Info required for matching: lustre-initialization-1 lustre-initialization_1 The test-framework code for b1_8 and probably b2_1 need to start using "--index" to specify the device index. This is not harmful for those earlier releases, but is required for orion (2.4). |
| Comments |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 15/Jun/12 ] |
|
Not a super critical problem, but we'll need it for testing interop on master in the next couple of months. It would stop a steady flow of "lustre-initialization_1" failures for orion, and we can begin doing actual automated interop testing. |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 17/Oct/12 ] |
mount -t lustre -o user_xattr,acl /dev/lvm-MDS/P1 /mnt/mds mount.lustre: /dev/mapper/lvm--MDS-P1 has no index assigned (probably formatted with old mkfs) I think it would be reasonable for mkfs_lustre.c to assume "--index=0" on an MDT if no index is specified. I think it will be some time before DNE is so prevalent that we need to require an index for the MDT. Also, it is misleading that even the 2.4 mkfs_lustre.c does no enforce an index for the MDT, but mount_lustre.c requires it. It also makes sense to patch the b2_1 test-framework.sh to always specify an index for the MDT, so that future interop testing continues to work. We won't have 1.8->2.5 interop testing, so that probably isn't necessary. |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 17/Oct/12 ] |
|
What version was the index requirement for MDT introduced? |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 17/Oct/12 ] |
|
So far only in the master branch, targeted for the 2.4 release. There is a requirement for specifying --index for the OSTs also, but that is less of a surprise, and there is a warning in the 2.3 mke2fs that it will be required. |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 17/Oct/12 ] |
|
So a if [ $(lustre_version_code $facet) -gt $(version_code 2.3.50) ]; then would be fine in the test suite? |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 17/Oct/12 ] |
|
Firstly, because the test-framework.sh script running on the client is from the old version (e.g. 1.8.8 or 2.1.3) which doesn't have that check, adding it into the master test-framework will not help. Secondly, I think this is a bit of a usability case as well. It makes sense to allow the 2.4 mkfs_lustre.c provide a default index = 0 for the MDT, but print a warning message (as was already added for 2.3 on OSTs) that an index will be required for MDT0000 in the future. |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 18/Oct/12 ] |
| Comment by Sarah Liu [ 29/Oct/12 ] |
|
This issue blocks the interop testing on 1.8 and 2.1, change priority to major |
| Comment by Peter Jones [ 05/Nov/12 ] |
|
A fix was landed to master a week ago for this issue. Can it now be marked as resolved or is further work required? |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 05/Nov/12 ] |
|
Andreas was hoping for a test to add to the test suite for this. |
| Comment by Jinshan Xiong (Inactive) [ 15/Nov/12 ] |
|
Another occurrence is at |
| Comment by Li Wei (Inactive) [ 19/Nov/12 ] |
|
This issue should not block 2.4. If we want to do interoperability testing with clients from an older release and 2.4 servers, then the test scripts in the older release need to be updated to supply "--index" at format time. |
| Comment by Li Wei (Inactive) [ 19/Nov/12 ] |
|
See also |
| Comment by Peter Jones [ 20/Nov/12 ] |
|
Liwei We do need to do interoperability testing with older releases. We are working on 2.1.4 at the moment and could also do a 1.8.9 release to include any changes necessary for testing to run smoothly. We also need to test interop with 2.3 but no maintenance releases are planned for that. What is the least impactful way to get as much of the interop testing as possible running routinely? Thanks Peter |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 20/Nov/12 ] |
|
Li Wei, we need to fix the automated interop testing in some manner. The easiest way is to add - |
| Comment by Li Wei (Inactive) [ 20/Nov/12 ] |
|
A simple patch adding "--index" support would diverge b1_8 and b2_1 test framework from master. Also, it would not allow us to test older clients with new servers using ZFS-base targets. Are you sure this is OK? (I'm not optimistic that I'll have cycles to work on this soon.) |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 23/Nov/12 ] |
|
Li Wei, this problem is a large number of tests to fail, and until we get interop testing to pass we are blocked from landing all new features onto master (DNE, etc), so it needs to be addressed with a high priority.
I don't understand your concern, could you please explain further. Adding support to the test framework in b2_1 (to be included in the 2.1.4 release) that always has t-f supply the --index would solve this problem. Explicitly supplying --index works in these older releases, and is in fact what users actually do. I would be happy to discuss this in Skype if it will move it along more quickly. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 29/Nov/12 ] |
|
Let me port the "--index" stuff from http://review.whamcloud.com/2907 to b2_1 and b1_8. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 29/Nov/12 ] |
|
Patch for b2_1 branch to add "--index" support is in http://review.whamcloud.com/4710. With the above patch, the auster test suite can be performed on b2_1 clients with master servers. However, during the testing, I found more test script interop issues, like:
and so on. |
| Comment by Li Wei (Inactive) [ 29/Nov/12 ] |
|
To expect green results even just from LDiskFS testing, we might want to consider these in addition:
|
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 30/Nov/12 ] |
|
Thanks Li Wei for pointing out the necessary patches. Let me port them along with testing. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 06/Dec/12 ] |
|
After the patch of http://review.whamcloud.com/4031 (test framework changes for new quota) was cherry-picked to b2_1 branch, I found that version_code() and lustre_version_code() were not added to b2_1 branch. Here is the patch to fix that: http://review.whamcloud.com/4754. The patch contains the fixes ported from:
More porting/testing works are in progress. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 07/Dec/12 ] |
The patch for b2_1 branch is in http://review.whamcloud.com/4767. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 10/Dec/12 ] |
The patch for b2_1 branch is in http://review.whamcloud.com/4783. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 10/Dec/12 ] |
The patch for b2_1 branch is in http://review.whamcloud.com/4821. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 13/Dec/12 ] |
The patch for b2_1 branch is in http://review.whamcloud.com/4832. |
| Comment by Jodi Levi (Inactive) [ 21/Dec/12 ] |
|
Has everything landed for this and can this be closed? |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 21/Dec/12 ] |
Hi Jodi, the patches also need to be backported to b1_8 branch. |
| Comment by Jodi Levi (Inactive) [ 26/Dec/12 ] |
|
Is a new patch needed for b1_8 or can Oleg cherry pick to land this to b1_8? |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 26/Dec/12 ] |
I've tried to apply the patches directly on b1_8 branch but hit conflicts. So, backporting is still needed. |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 27/Dec/12 ] |
|
Here are the patches backported to b1_8 branch: |
| Comment by Jian Yu [ 17/Jan/13 ] |
|
The patches have been landed on b2_1 and b1_8 branches separately. |