[LU-7606] sanity-test_230b test failed 2015-12-16 06:26:06 Lustre: DEBUG MARKER: test_230b: @@@@@@ FAIL: nested remote directory create succeed!

• Status: Resolved
• Project: Lustre
• Type: Bug
• Priority: Minor
• Reporter: parinay v kondekar (Inactive)
• Assignee: WC Triage
• Resolution: Won't Fix
• Labels: patch

Environment

Interop = Server: 2.7.64 Client: 2.5.x
MDSCOUNT=3 OSTCOUNT=2

• Severity: 3

Description

== sanity test 230b: nested remote directory should be failed == 06:26:05 (1450247165)
sanity test_230b: @@@@@@ FAIL: nested remote directory create succeed!
Trace dump:
= /usr/lib64/lustre/tests/test-framework.sh:4672:error()
= /usr/lib64/lustre/tests/sanity.sh:12455:test_230b()
= /usr/lib64/lustre/tests/test-framework.sh:4932:run_one()
= /usr/lib64/lustre/tests/test-framework.sh:4968:run_one_logged()
= /usr/lib64/lustre/tests/test-framework.sh:4774:run_test()
= /usr/lib64/lustre/tests/sanity.sh:12479:main()
Dumping lctl log to /tmp/test_logs/1450247144/sanity.test_230b.*.1450247166.log

Comments

[Andreas Dilger]

This test description for sanity test_230b() doesn't match what is in master run_test 230b "migrate directory"? Is this a test that you added locally?

[parinay v kondekar (Inactive)]

Hello Andreas,
> This test description for sanity test_230b() doesn't match what is in master run_test 230b "migrate directory"?
Yes. Its interop run. Client is 2.5.x running "nested remote directory should be failed" test.

Should this be SKIPPed ? if so I will add /push a patch accordingly.

> Is this a test that you added locally?
No. http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/4358 , but as I said, its 2.5.x client

Thanks

[Andreas Dilger]

The ability to create nested remote directories depends on a /proc setting on the MDS whether the user or group can create remote directories and/or remote directories with parents other than MDT0000. It may be this setting is different between 2.5 and 2.7, or changed in your test environment? It is also a bit strange that these tests were removed.

Maybe Di can comment on this?

[Di Wang]

Oh, those nested remote check under /proc has been removed in master, since those loop namespace tree can not be avoided with cross-MDT rename and link. Plus we now have async update, which will make sure the cross-MDT namespace consistency anyway.

[Di Wang]

Ah, it seems mdt_enable_remote_dir still exists under /proc

[root@testnode tests]# find /proc/fs/lustre/ | grep enable_remote_dir
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0003/enable_remote_dir_gid
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0003/enable_remote_dir
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0002/enable_remote_dir_gid
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0002/enable_remote_dir
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0001/enable_remote_dir_gid
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0001/enable_remote_dir
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0000/enable_remote_dir_gid
/proc/fs/lustre/mdt/lustre-MDT0000/enable_remote_dir

{no format}

So we need remove it, and also add version check on 2.5.x.

[parinay v kondekar (Inactive)]

Thanks Di, Andreas.
Will work on the patch and push it for review.

[Gerrit Updater]

Parinay Kondekar ([e-mail]) uploaded a new patch: http://review.whamcloud.com/17873
Subject: LU-7606 sanity-test_230b FAIL: nested remote directory create succeed!
Project: fs/lustre-release
Branch: master
Current Patch Set: 1
Commit: 8e31e3cd986e6de52efe73480a1b674f4b4566fb

[parinay v kondekar (Inactive)]

There are scripts which are setting "enable_mdt_remote_dir" - need to fix those as well, I think.

[Gerrit Updater]

Parinay Kondekar ([e-mail]) uploaded a new patch: http://review.whamcloud.com/17947
Subject: LU-7606 test: SKIP sanity/230b for 2.5.x
Project: fs/lustre-release
Branch: b2_5
Current Patch Set: 1
Commit: 5475e35f919065827d527380adedc71f4b05bffa

[parinay v kondekar (Inactive)]

Andreas, Di,
Should I be pushing the test patch for master branch ? Correct me if wrong. Thanks.

[Di Wang]

yes, you can push the test patch to master branch, but please add version check there, i.e. only set this when MDS version < 2.7.64.

[parinay v kondekar (Inactive)]

Di,
I have incorporated the changes, Can you review the patch please ? appreciate your time. Thanks