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-4202 Lustre <p>This issue was created by maloo for Nathaniel Clark &lt;nathaniel.l.clark@intel.com&gt;</p> <p>This issue relates to the following test suite run: <a href="http://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/b6717d88-4462-11e3-8472-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/b6717d88-4462-11e3-8472-52540035b04c</a>.</p> <p>The sub-test test_8 failed with the following error:</p> <blockquote> <p>(22) Expect 'scanning-phase2', but got 'scanning-phase1'</p></blockquote> <p>Info required for matching: sanity-lfsck 8</p> LU-4202

Test failure sanity-lfsck test_8: Expect 'scanning-phase2', but got 'scanning-phase1'

Technical task LU-3489 Major Resolved Fixed Andreas Dilger Maloo prz zfs Mon, 4 Nov 2013 14:57:05 +0000 Mon, 22 Sep 2014 03:57:40 +0000 Thu, 8 May 2014 15:18:47 +0000 Lustre 2.6.0 Lustre 2.6.0 0 9 <p>Is this only failing tests when the ZFS scrub code is enabled via <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/7149" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/7149</a> so this isn't actually a failure on the current master branch</p> <p>We still want to land that patch, but only once this problem is fixed. Is it possible that the ZFS scrub is just slower than ldiskfs?</p> <p><a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/b6717d88-4462-11e3-8472-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/b6717d88-4462-11e3-8472-52540035b04c</a></p> <p>sanity-lfsck test_9a failed also:<br/> Error: '(7) Expect 'completed', but got 'scanning-phase1'' </p> <p>The ldiskfs scrub speed in my local VM environment is not slower than 5'000 objs/sec, even if ZFS scrub speed is only 1/10 of the ldiskfs, it should finished in time.</p> <p>hmm, it passes on my local setup consistently..</p> <p>I changed number of objects in test 8 to 20K and run the test again:</p> <p>average_speed_phase1: 5254 items/sec<br/> average_speed_phase2: N/A<br/> real-time_speed_phase1: 10445 items/sec<br/> real-time_speed_phase2: N/A<br/> current_position: 10287, <span class="error">&#91;0x200000400:0x277b:0x0&#93;</span>, 6445470245971689472<br/> sanity-lfsck test_8: @@@@@@ FAIL: (22) Expect 'scanning-phase2', but got 'scanning-phase1' </p> <p>the changed patch is submitted for testing: it should dump stats upon a failure.</p> <p>One more instance on master branch with FSTYPE=zfs:<br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/24843856-b48e-11e3-8272-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/24843856-b48e-11e3-8272-52540035b04c</a></p> <p>More failure instance:</p> <p><a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sessions/a7e15cfa-b525-11e3-8598-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sessions/a7e15cfa-b525-11e3-8598-52540035b04c</a><br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sessions/05cc2dc6-b51d-11e3-b2ed-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sessions/05cc2dc6-b51d-11e3-b2ed-52540035b04c</a><br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/5f9bd3a0-b52d-11e3-b716-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/5f9bd3a0-b52d-11e3-b716-52540035b04c</a><br/> <a href="https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sessions/f69ba95c-b53b-11e3-b2ed-52540035b04c" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sessions/f69ba95c-b53b-11e3-b2ed-52540035b04c</a></p> <p>I'm working on a patch to make sanity-lfsck use wait_update_facet() for most of the checks, so that the test will be more tolerant for slowdowns in the tests. </p> <p>Andreas, the replacement sleep with wait_update_facet() has been done in the patch:<br/> <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/9704" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/9704</a></p> <p>Patch landed to Master. Please reopen ticket if more work is needed.</p> <p>Is this a relevant fix for getting landed on b2_5?</p> <p>The patch <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/9704" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/9704</a> is valuable for b2_5 also, but it cannot be directly applied on b2_5.</p> <p>The back-ported patches are tracked under <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-5241" title="2.4.3&lt;-&gt;2.5.2 interop: sanity-lfsck test_0: FAIL: (9) Expect &#39;completed&#39;, but got &#39;scanning-phase1&#39;" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-5241"><del>LU-5241</del></a>.</p> Related LU-4556 Development Rank 1|hzw7vb: Rank (Obsolete) 11421