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-1517 Lustre <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>lnd_cb.c:558:kgnilnd_setup_phys_buffer()) failed to allocate tx_phys [2012-04-07 02:08:24][c5-0c0s5n2]LNet: 29099:0:(gnilnd_cb.c:1068:kgnilnd_tx_done()) $$ error -12 on tx 0xffff88000fe06b40-&gt;&lt;?&gt; id 0/0 state GNILND_TX_ALLOCD age 17481575s msg@0xffff88000fe06bc0 m/v/ty/ck/pck/pl b00fbabe/8/3/0/78db/0 x0:GNILND_MSG_PUT_REQ [2012-04-07 02:08:24][c5-0c0s5n2]LustreError: 29099:0:(events.c:198:client_bulk_callback()) event type 0, status -5, desc ffff880627c24000 </pre> </div></div> <p>The error is detected on both client and server; the server expects the client to retry but it doesn't. In the mean time, the OSS issues a lock callback to the client, but the client does not respond because it is waiting for the I/O to complete. Eventually the OSS evicts the client. Lustre does not retry the bulk op when it detects the error.</p> LU-1517

no retry for the bulk operation

Bug Critical Resolved Fixed Keith Mannthey Alexander Boyko patch Wed, 13 Jun 2012 09:12:36 +0000 Fri, 22 Feb 2013 11:17:28 +0000 Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:36:26 +0000 Lustre 1.8.8 Lustre 2.4.0 Lustre 2.1.4 Lustre 1.8.9 0 7 <p>Review request <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/3102" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/3102</a></p> <p>Hi,</p> <p>Have WC/Intel had time to review our proposed patch yet? </p> <p>-cf</p> <p>Cray has been using this patch and it is effective.</p> <p>The patch has been reviewed and is awaiting final merger. </p> <p>I just wanted to say that 1.8 is in more of a maintenance mode at this point. The patch looks fine but very few things are landing in 1.8 right now. </p> <p>Understood. Trigerring this bug results in client eviction though. Just FYI.</p> <p>I'm fine with landing the patch on b1_8. That said, it seems that master suffers from the same issue, right?<br/> If so, it would be great to push a patch against master.<br/> Thanks in advance!</p> <p>Johann, for master, have you seen <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-901" title="LustreError: 25196:0:(client.c:1696:ptlrpc_check_set()) LBUG" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-901"><del>LU-901</del></a> and change #4092? Or does it only partially address the fault?</p> <p>Yes, it is curious that we landed this fix to b1_8 before master. FYI, Cray has been using this fix on our 2.2 for some time and testing has gone well. We should push it to master now while we wait for <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-901" title="LustreError: 25196:0:(client.c:1696:ptlrpc_check_set()) LBUG" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-901"><del>LU-901</del></a>.</p> <p>Sure, let's push review 3102 to all branches first (b1_8, b2_1, b2_2, b2_3 and master). Then more intrusive changes (like 4092) can be considered on master.</p> <p>The patch ported easily as expected so I sent it to the various branches. </p> <p><a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/4296" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/4296</a> &lt;- b2_1 <br/> <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/4297" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/4297</a> &lt;- b2_2 <br/> <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/4298" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/4298</a> &lt;- b2_3<br/> <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/4299" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/4299</a> &lt;- Master </p> <p>I think that we should at least land the master patch.</p> <p>Ok it seems the patches for 1.8,2.3 and Master has been merged. 2.2 and 2.3 are dead branches at this point. </p> <p>I think this issue is safe to close. Please reopen if you disagree. </p> Development Rank 1|hzv32v: Rank (Obsolete) 3998 Severity