[LU-16645] rmfid returns "unrecognized FID: 1" Created: 17/Mar/23 Updated: 21/Mar/23 Resolved: 21/Mar/23 |
|
| Status: | Resolved |
| Project: | Lustre |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Minor |
| Reporter: | Arshad Hussain | Assignee: | Andreas Dilger |
| Resolution: | Not a Bug | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Severity: | 3 |
| Rank (Obsolete): | 9223372036854775807 |
| Description |
|
This was seen multiple time while working on LU-16618. Will add more debugging details soon. Given all inputs are correct. lfs rmfid returns unrecogized fid: 1. $ lfs rmfid lustre [0x200000402:0x1:0x0] unrecognized FID: 1 Looks like the input itself is already mangled when sent to server. Ouput of strace <snip>
1 execve("/usr/bin/lfs", ["lfs", "rmfid", "lustreT", "1"], 0x7ffe70d14d18 /* 53 vars */) = 0
<snip>
client/server version
Client: 2.15.54.79 MDS: 2.15.54.79 OSS: 2.15.54.79
Kernel version: 4.18.0-372.9.1.el8.x86_64 |
| Comments |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 18/Mar/23 ] |
|
Is this because of a file named "1" in the current directory? Using "[0x200000402:0x1:0x0]" around the FID will be resolved by bash equivalent to a regexp of "[0124:x]" so it would match a file named "1" (eg. from a badly-directed stdout). Presumably the test would pass if the FID was given without "[]" around it. |
| Comment by Arshad Hussain [ 20/Mar/23 ] |
Is this because of a file named "1" in the current directory? Using "[0x200000402:0x1:0x0]" around the FID will be resolved by bash equivalent to a regexp of "[0124:x]" so it would match a file named "1" (eg. from a badly-directed stdout). Thanks for the inputs. There is no manual input and lustre is mounted fresh every time. (ran as standard ONLY=421aa lustre/tests/sanity.sh). I will check on this further.
Presumably the test would pass if the FID was given without "[]" around it. Understood. Since I am using it within script. Just (lazily) passing the '[ ]' without removing it.
|
| Comment by Arshad Hussain [ 21/Mar/23 ] |
Is this because of a file named "1" in the current directory? <snip> Andreas, I now get what you meant. Sorry for not getting it first time. |
| Comment by Arshad Hussain [ 21/Mar/23 ] |
|
Not an lfs bug. (See Andreas's comments) within ticket. |