[LU-6630] ldlm_intent_getattr_client RPC mbo_valid flags do not match those returned Created: 21/May/15  Updated: 13/Sep/16

Status: Open
Project: Lustre
Component/s: None
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Minor
Reporter: Andrew Uselton (Inactive) Assignee: WC Triage
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: None

Issue Links:
Related
is related to LU-6353 Push Wireshark Support Upstream Resolved
Severity: 3
Rank (Obsolete): 9223372036854775807

 Description   

Attached is a Wireshark output of an interaction that shows LDLM_ENQUEUE request and reply with inconsistent mbo_valid flags. The attached output has the detailed field values of a sequence of RPCs that resulted (to and from a particular client) when an 'fstat' operation was carried out. This was from the command line:
multiop /lfs/andrew/testDir/fstatTest OSc
You will see path lookup RPCs first. Scroll down to the first mention of "intent : getattr". It will be the next LDLM_ENQUEUE RPC after the ones that do the open of "fstatTest". In the request RPC the mbo_valid field has '2768391860191', which is '0x28491036fdf'. This breaks out as the following 21 flags:

OBD_MD_FLID
OBD_MD_FLATIME
OBD_MD_FLMTIME
OBD_MD_FLCTIME
OBD_MD_FLSIZE
OBD_MD_FLBLKSZ
OBD_MD_FLMODE
OBD_MD_FLTYPE
OBD_MD_FLUID
OBD_MD_FLGID
OBD_MD_FLFLAGS
OBD_MD_FLNLINK
OBD_MD_FLGENER
OBD_MD_FLRDEV
OBD_MD_FLEASIZE
OBD_MD_FLGROUP
OBD_MD_FLDIREA
OBD_MD_FLMODEASIZE
OBD_MD_MEA
OBD_MD_FLACL
OBD_MD_FLMDSCAPA

The next RPC is the LDLM_ENQUEUE reply from the MDS to this request. In it the mbo_valid field is 551903440783 = 0x8080022f8f, which breaks out as these 13 flags:

OBD_MD_FLID
OBD_MD_FLATIME
OBD_MD_FLMTIME
OBD_MD_FLCTIME
OBD_MD_FLMODE
OBD_MD_FLTYPE
OBD_MD_FLUID
OBD_MD_FLGID
OBD_MD_FLFLAGS
OBD_MD_FLNLINK
OBD_MD_FLEASIZE
OBD_MD_FLMODEASIZE
OBD_MD_FLACL

A proper subset. Please explain the discrepancy. Andreas has suggested that the client request should list at_least all the field values that should be returned, but the MDT is not honoring that in its request. He speculated this may be a sign of dead code.


Generated at Sat Feb 10 02:01:52 UTC 2024 using Jira 9.4.14#940014-sha1:734e6822bbf0d45eff9af51f82432957f73aa32c.