[LU-696] Test failure on test suite sanity, subtest test_101c Created: 21/Sep/11  Updated: 02/Mar/12  Resolved: 02/Mar/12

Status: Closed
Project: Lustre
Component/s: None
Affects Version/s: Lustre 2.1.0, Lustre 1.8.7
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Minor
Reporter: Maloo Assignee: Yang Sheng
Resolution: Won't Fix Votes: 0
Labels: None
Environment:

Lustre Clients:
Tag: 1.8.6-wc1
Distro/Arch: RHEL6/x86_64 (kernel version: 2.6.32_131.2.1.el6)
Build: http://newbuild.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-b1_8/100/arch=x86_64,build_type=client,distro=el6,ib_stack=inkernel/
Network: TCP
ENABLE_QUOTA=yes

Lustre Servers:
Tag: v2_1_0_0_RC2
Distro/Arch: RHEL6/x86_64 (kernel version: 2.6.32-131.6.1.el6_lustre.g65156ed.x86_64)
Build: http://newbuild.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-master/228/arch=x86_64,build_type=server,distro=el6,ib_stack=inkernel/
Network: TCP


Severity: 3
Rank (Obsolete): 6113

 Description   

This issue was created by maloo for Minh Diep <mdiep@whamcloud.com>

This issue relates to the following test suite run: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/9d355b6c-e43f-11e0-9909-52540025f9af.

The sub-test test_101c failed with the following error:

No 128k readahead IO 0



 Comments   
Comment by Minh Diep [ 21/Sep/11 ]

== sanity test 101c: check stripe_size aligned read-ahead =================== 01:12:22 (1316506342)
osc.lustre-OST0000-osc-ffff88007aa6a400.rpc_stats=0
osc.lustre-OST0001-osc-ffff88007aa6a400.rpc_stats=0
osc.lustre-OST0002-osc-ffff88007aa6a400.rpc_stats=0
osc.lustre-OST0003-osc-ffff88007aa6a400.rpc_stats=0
osc.lustre-OST0004-osc-ffff88007aa6a400.rpc_stats=0
osc.lustre-OST0005-osc-ffff88007aa6a400.rpc_stats=0
osc.lustre-OST0006-osc-ffff88007aa6a400.rpc_stats=0

4.296548s, 152.532MB/s
Small rpc check passed!
Big rpc check passed!
Small rpc check passed!
Big rpc check passed!
Small rpc check passed!
sanity test_101c: @@@@@@ FAIL: No 128k readahead IO 0
Dumping lctl log to /logdir/test_logs/2011-09-19/lustre-mixed-el6-x86_64_283_-7f6a2ad2c9e0/sanity.test_101c.*.1316506351.log
Big rpc check passed!
Small rpc check passed!
Big rpc check passed!
Small rpc check passed!
Big rpc check passed!
Small rpc check passed!
Big rpc check passed!
Small rpc check passed!
Big rpc check passed!
Resetting fail_loc on all nodes...done.

Comment by Jian Yu [ 23/Sep/11 ]

Lustre Clients:
Tag: 1.8.6-wc1
Distro/Arch: RHEL6/x86_64 (kernel version: 2.6.32_131.2.1.el6)
Build: http://newbuild.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-b1_8/100/arch=x86_64,build_type=client,distro=el6,ib_stack=inkernel/
Network: TCP (1GigE)
ENABLE_QUOTA=yes

Lustre Servers:
Tag: v2_1_0_0_RC2
Distro/Arch: RHEL6/x86_64 (kernel version: 2.6.32-131.6.1.el6_lustre)
Build: http://newbuild.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-master/283/arch=x86_64,build_type=server,distro=el6,ib_stack=inkernel/

sanity test 101c also failed in manual run: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/1e2337f0-e5b5-11e0-9909-52540025f9af

It passed while running on Lustre 1.8.6-wc1 clients with 2.1.0 RC1 servers:
https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/63598d8a-cee3-11e0-8d02-52540025f9af

Comment by Jian Yu [ 10/Oct/11 ]

Lustre Branch: b1_8
Lustre Build: http://newbuild.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-b1_8/134/
Distro/Arch: RHEL5/x86_64 (kernel version: 2.6.18_274.3.1.el5)
Network: TCP (1GigE)

sanity test 101c also failed: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/3cbc97e6-f24a-11e0-908b-52540025f9af

Comment by Jian Yu [ 15/Feb/12 ]

Lustre Clients:
Tag: 1.8.7-wc1
Distro/Arch: RHEL6/x86_64 (kernel version: 2.6.32-131.12.1.el6)
Build: http://build.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-b1_8/171/
Network: TCP (1GigE)
ENABLE_QUOTA=yes

Lustre Servers:
Tag: v2_1_1_0_RC2
Distro/Arch: RHEL6/x86_64 (kernel version: 2.6.32-220.el6_lustre.g4554b65)
Build: http://build.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-b2_1/41/
Network: TCP (1GigE)

sanity test 101c also failed: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/a23649e4-5791-11e1-99fa-5254004bbbd3

Comment by Peter Jones [ 29/Feb/12 ]

YangSheng

Could you please look into this one?

Thanks

Peter

Comment by Yang Sheng [ 01/Mar/12 ]

The commit f1a4b79e378407e4161c2a922478d625a38452b5 already remove the big rpc in 101c, So looks like this issue can be ignore? Maybe WangDi has some point for that.

Comment by Di Wang [ 01/Mar/12 ]

Yes, that check is not correct. The patch for lu-983(http://review.whamcloud.com/#change,1998) will remove that check.

Comment by Yang Sheng [ 02/Mar/12 ]

AS WangDi's comment, close it.

Generated at Sat Feb 10 01:09:32 UTC 2024 using Jira 9.4.14#940014-sha1:734e6822bbf0d45eff9af51f82432957f73aa32c.