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-2540 Lustre <p>sanity.sh test 74c failed: FAIL: test_74c Touch successful.</p> <p>/var/log/messages at the client showed:<br/> Dec 27 15:54:48 service331 kernel: [ 1397.672701] Lustre: DEBUG MARKER: == sanity test 74c: ldlm_lock_create error path, (shouldn't LBUG) ==================================== 15:54:48 (1356652488)<br/> Dec 27 15:54:48 service331 kernel: [ 1397.719360] Lustre: *** cfs_fail_loc=319, val=0***<br/> Dec 27 15:54:48 service331 kernel: [ 1397.719385] LustreError: 9373:0:(mdc_locks.c:773:mdc_enqueue()) ldlm_cli_enqueue: -12<br/> Dec 27 15:54:48 service331 kernel: [ 1397.742866] LustreError: 9373:0:(file.c:2333:ll_inode_revalidate_fini()) failure -12 inode 29<br/> Dec 27 15:54:48 service331 kernel: [ 1397.898789] Lustre: DEBUG MARKER: sanity test_74c: @@@@@@ FAIL: Touch successful<br/> Dec 27 15:54:50 service331 kernel: [ 1399.583195] Lustre: DEBUG MARKER: == sanity sanity.sh test complete, duration 7 sec ==================================================== 15:54:50 (1356652490)</p> server: lustre-2.1.3-1nasS centos 6.3<br/> client: lustre-2.3.0-1nasC sles11sp2 3.0.42-0.7.3 LU-2540

test: sanity FAIL: test_74c Touch successful

Bug Minor Resolved Cannot Reproduce Bob Glossman Jay Lan tests Thu, 27 Dec 2012 19:08:26 +0000 Fri, 16 Oct 2015 04:22:54 +0000 Fri, 16 Oct 2015 04:22:54 +0000 Lustre 2.3.0 0 6 <p>Bob</p> <p>Could you please look into this one?</p> <p>Thanks</p> <p>Peter</p> <p>Haven't been able to reproduce this problem with current (2.3.57) Centos servers and sles11 sp2 client. Suggests this problem is probably version specific.</p> <p>When I put up a pure b2_3 sles11 sp2 client I still wasn't able to reproduce the problem.</p> <p>The msg output reported suggests the client is seeing -12 (-ENOMEM), which is the expected error generated by the fail_loc value set in the test. strace output of the touch command suggests that error is being reported up to the touch command. I'm not sure how the test could fail that being the case.</p> <p><a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/348ae5ee-c1b2-11e2-9e40-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/348ae5ee-c1b2-11e2-9e40-52540035b04c</a><br/> master (circa 2.4.50) </p> <p>Another failure instance:</p> <p><a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/27eed06a-efc1-11e2-b957-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/27eed06a-efc1-11e2-b957-52540035b04c</a></p> <p>Made this test more robust in patch <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/9766/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/9766/</a></p> <p>This can be closed. I have not seen failure on this test for a long while... maybe since 2.4?</p> <p>Thanks Jay!</p> Development Rank 1|hzvebz: Rank (Obsolete) 5961 Severity