https://jira.whamcloud.com This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 9.4.14 940014 05-12-2023 https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-10869 Lustre <p>conf-sanity test_76a fails to ‘/usr/sbin/lctl set_param -P osc.*.max_dirty_mb=64’. The last thing seen in the test_log is</p> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>Change MGS params max_dirty_mb: 32 new_max_dirty_mb: 64 CMD: trevis-50vm10 /usr/sbin/lctl set_param -P osc.*.max_dirty_mb=64 CMD: trevis-52vm7.trevis.hpdd.intel.com /usr/sbin/lctl get_param -n osc.*.max_dirty_mb |                    head -1 CMD: trevis-52vm7.trevis.hpdd.intel.com /usr/sbin/lctl get_param -n osc.*.max_dirty_mb |                    head -1 Waiting 90 secs for update CMD: trevis-52vm7.trevis.hpdd.intel.com /usr/sbin/lctl get_param -n osc.*.max_dirty_mb |                    head -1 … CMD: trevis-52vm7.trevis.hpdd.intel.com /usr/sbin/lctl get_param -n osc.*.max_dirty_mb |                    head -1 Update not seen after 90s: wanted '64' got '32' 32  conf-sanity test_76a: @@@@@@ FAIL: error while apply max_dirty_mb </pre> </div></div> <p> </p> <p>On the MDS console and dmesg, we see that the command issues on the MGS/MDS is</p> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>[33955.881468] Lustre: DEBUG MARKER: trevis-50vm9.trevis.hpdd.intel.com: executing set_default_debug -1 all 4 [33965.425226] Lustre: DEBUG MARKER: /usr/sbin/lctl set_param -P osc.*.max_dirty_mb=64 [34056.950846] Lustre: DEBUG MARKER: /usr/sbin/lctl mark  conf-sanity test_76a: @@@@@@ FAIL: error while apply max_dirty_mb </pre> </div></div> <p> </p> <p>This test has failed with this error previously while testing the patch for <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-9325" title="Improve lustre kernel string handling" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-9325">LU-9325</a>, <a href="https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/30539/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/30539/</a>.</p> <p> </p> <p>Logs for this failure are at</p> <p><a href="https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/a77f2e70-3543-11e8-95c0-52540065bddc" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/a77f2e70-3543-11e8-95c0-52540065bddc</a></p> <p> </p> LU-10869

conf-sanity test 76a fails with 'error while apply max_dirty_mb'

Bug Minor Resolved Fixed Nathaniel Clark James Nunez ubuntu Sun, 1 Apr 2018 03:20:19 +0000 Tue, 19 Jun 2018 20:20:52 +0000 Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:52:58 +0000 Lustre 2.11.0 Lustre 2.12.0 Lustre 2.10.5 0 6 <p>Oh crap. I think I know why this fails. No udev rule is being packaged for Ubuntu.</p> <p>Nathaniel</p> <p>Can you please investigate?</p> <p>Thanks</p> <p>Peter</p> <p>It looks like Client code gets info from MGS:</p> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (obd_config.c:1057:process_param2_config()) Process entered Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:361:print_lustre_cfg()) Process entered Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:366:print_lustre_cfg()) lustre_cfg: ffff88004532f600 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:367:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_version: 0x1cf60001 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:369:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_command: 0xce032 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:370:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_num: 0x0 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:371:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_flags: 0x0 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:372:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_nid: 0@&lt;0:0&gt; Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:374:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_bufcount: 3 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:379:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_buflens[0]: 19 *-ffff880049c30000 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:379:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_buflens[1]: 22 osc.*.max_dirty_mb=64 Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:379:print_lustre_cfg()) lcfg-&gt;lcfg_buflens[2]: 5 lctl Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (llog_swab.c:382:print_lustre_cfg()) Process leaving Sat Mar 31 05:54:52 2018 [18642] (obd_config.c:1090:process_param2_config()) Process leaving (rc=0 : 0 : 0) </pre> </div></div> <p>This may be a subtle regression of <a href="https://review.whamcloud.com/30143" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://review.whamcloud.com/30143</a> (<a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-9431" title="class_process_proc_param can&#39;t handle sysfs" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-9431"><del>LU-9431</del></a>) since it takes the new code path in the failing case. Or maybe an issue/difference with kobj's in Linux 4.4?</p> <p>James Simmons (uja.ornl@yahoo.com) uploaded a new patch: <a href="https://review.whamcloud.com/31850" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://review.whamcloud.com/31850</a><br/> Subject: <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-10869" title="conf-sanity test 76a fails with &#39;error while apply max_dirty_mb&#39;" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-10869"><del>LU-10869</del></a> build: package configuration files for Ubuntu / Debian<br/> Project: fs/lustre-release<br/> Branch: master<br/> Current Patch Set: 1<br/> Commit: d664a1f3b00d98a631dc57d262d9f9e89d7096ea</p> <p>Now that we have the proper udev rules being packaged for Ubuntu it should pass. Note for lctl set_param -P to work you need the following basic udev rule:</p> <p>SUBSYSTEM=="lustre", ACTION=="change", ENV{PARAM}=="?*", RUN+="/usr/sbin/lctl set_param $env{PARAM}=$env{SETTING}"</p> <p>In 99-lustre.rules.</p> <p>Nathaniel can you take another look please.</p> <p>Patch looks good, when I tested it locally.</p> <p>Oleg Drokin (oleg.drokin@intel.com) merged in patch <a href="https://review.whamcloud.com/31850/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://review.whamcloud.com/31850/</a><br/> Subject: <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-10869" title="conf-sanity test 76a fails with &#39;error while apply max_dirty_mb&#39;" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-10869"><del>LU-10869</del></a> build: package configuration files for Ubuntu / Debian<br/> Project: fs/lustre-release<br/> Branch: master<br/> Current Patch Set: <br/> Commit: 8f221cf65b644d798493da489674abd2e2b7f23f</p> <p>Landed for 2.12</p> <p>Minh Diep (minh.diep@intel.com) uploaded a new patch: <a href="https://review.whamcloud.com/32471" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://review.whamcloud.com/32471</a><br/> Subject: <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-10869" title="conf-sanity test 76a fails with &#39;error while apply max_dirty_mb&#39;" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-10869"><del>LU-10869</del></a> build: package configuration files for Ubuntu / Debian<br/> Project: fs/lustre-release<br/> Branch: b2_10<br/> Current Patch Set: 1<br/> Commit: d4004c95ef7b3cbbbe9e539524068a863abbdf11</p> <p>John L. Hammond (john.hammond@intel.com) merged in patch <a href="https://review.whamcloud.com/32471/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://review.whamcloud.com/32471/</a><br/> Subject: <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-10869" title="conf-sanity test 76a fails with &#39;error while apply max_dirty_mb&#39;" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-10869"><del>LU-10869</del></a> build: package configuration files for Ubuntu / Debian<br/> Project: fs/lustre-release<br/> Branch: b2_10<br/> Current Patch Set: <br/> Commit: 74d56ecdf3d87c9baa1b8b9d67cd11617d5bea9c</p> Related LU-6063 LU-9431 Development Rank 1|hzzv2n: Rank (Obsolete) 9223372036854775807 Severity