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-2245 Lustre <p>This issue was created by maloo for sarah &lt;sarah@whamcloud.com&gt;</p> <p>This issue relates to the following test suite run: <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/34cdc80e-21c2-11e2-b552-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/34cdc80e-21c2-11e2-b552-52540035b04c</a>.</p> <p>The sub-test test_101c failed with the following error:</p> <blockquote> <p>Small 4k read IO 1!</p></blockquote> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>== sanity test 101c: check stripe_size aligned read-ahead =================== 00:07:32 (1351494452) CMD: client-21-ib /usr/sbin/lctl set_param -n obdfilter.*.read_cache_enable=0 client-21-ib: error: set_param: /proc/{fs,sys}/{lnet,lustre}/obdfilter/*/read_cache_enable: Found no match CMD: client-21-ib /usr/sbin/lctl set_param -n obdfilter.*.writethrough_cache_enable=0 client-21-ib: error: set_param: /proc/{fs,sys}/{lnet,lustre}/obdfilter/*/writethrough_cache_enable: Found no match osc.lustre-OST0000-osc-ffff8803348f2000.rpc_stats=0 osc.lustre-OST0001-osc-ffff8803348f2000.rpc_stats=0 osc.lustre-OST0002-osc-ffff8803348f2000.rpc_stats=0 osc.lustre-OST0003-osc-ffff8803348f2000.rpc_stats=0 osc.lustre-OST0004-osc-ffff8803348f2000.rpc_stats=0 osc.lustre-OST0005-osc-ffff8803348f2000.rpc_stats=0 osc.lustre-OST0006-osc-ffff8803348f2000.rpc_stats=0 6.364788s, 102.967MB/s osc.lustre-OST0000-osc-ffff8803348f2000 rpc check passed! osc.lustre-OST0001-osc-ffff8803348f2000 rpc check passed! sanity test_101c: @@@@@@ FAIL: Small 4k read IO 1! Trace dump: </pre> </div></div> server/client are both RHEL6 LU-2245

failure on sanity.sh test_101c: Small 4k read IO 1!

Bug Minor Resolved Fixed Li Wei Maloo Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:35:26 +0000 Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:03:12 +0000 Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:03:12 +0000 Lustre 2.4.0 0 8 <p>The procfs access problems should be fixed by updating the test to use set_obdfilter_param(), as the parameters in question are now exported by OSDs.</p> {comment removed, unrelated to this bug} <p>SLES11 SP2 client also has this issue:<br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/d0072b9c-2534-11e2-9e7c-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/d0072b9c-2534-11e2-9e7c-52540035b04c</a></p> <p>Wang Di, could you take a look at this?</p> <p>More instances:<br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/313ec4a8-2fe2-11e2-866f-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/313ec4a8-2fe2-11e2-866f-52540035b04c</a><br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/669d8a72-2fb4-11e2-b30e-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/669d8a72-2fb4-11e2-b30e-52540035b04c</a></p> <p>I just checked these failures, Sorry for the delay. The test is failed because there are single page RPC during read-ahead. One possible reason might be we do random 64k reading here, if some pages are being evicted because of memory pressure, and these area(64) are being read again, we might see single page RPC here. Probably we should add no-duplicate options in reads, i.e. no area should be read twice even for random read. </p> <p>But I am not sure it is the real reason here, since there are not enough debug log here. Is this reproducible ? </p> <p>Found only two failures of test_101c() in the past 4 weeks:<br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/sub_tests/313362c4-6bac-11e2-a7b9-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/sub_tests/313362c4-6bac-11e2-a7b9-52540035b04c</a><br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/sub_tests/9e3f4c7a-5d83-11e2-8199-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/sub_tests/9e3f4c7a-5d83-11e2-8199-52540035b04c</a></p> <p>Lowered priority, since there are more important bugs to fix for now.</p> <p>I'm hitting this error with different values for the RPCs at <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/ecfe391a-c41c-11e3-a793-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/ecfe391a-c41c-11e3-a793-52540035b04c</a> </p> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>Small 32k read IO 240 ! </pre> </div></div> <p>This recent burst of failures was caused by patch 7803 landing. </p> <p>Closing this issue since we haven't seen this failure recently, outside of the previously reported and unrelated issue. </p> Related LU-3963 Development Rank 1|hzvazr: Rank (Obsolete) 5317 Severity