Thanks! I'm creating a build with the new patches now. I'll let you know how testing goes. On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 12/02/2012 10:43 PM, Alex Elder wrote: >> On 12/01/2012 11:34 PM, Nick Bartos wrote: >>> Unfortunately the hangs happen with the new set of patches. Here's >>> some debug info: >>> >>> https://gist.github.com/raw/4187123/90194ce172130244a9c1c968ed185eee7282d809/gistfile1.txt >>> >> >> Well I'm sorry to hear that but I'm glad to have the new info. >> >> In retrospect running the new patches *without* the one that >> seems to cause the hang (#50) were good validation that they >> didn't lead to any new problems. >> >> I'll look at this some more in the morning, and I think I'll >> confer with Sage whenever he's available for ideas on how to >> proceed. > > Over the course of last week I have been finding and fixing a > few problems in rbd, the osd client, and the messenger in the > Linux kernel code. I've added a handful of new patches to the > end of the ones I gave you last time. > > At this point I don't expect these changes directly affect > the hangs you have been seeing, but a couple of these are > real problems you could (also) hit, and I'd like to avoid > that. > > I haven't done rigorous testing on this but I believe > the changes are correct (and Sage has looked at them > and says they look OK to him). > > The new version is available in the branch "wip-nick-new" > in the ceph-client git repository. If you reproduce your > hang with this updated code (or do not), please let me know. > > Thanks. > > -Alex > > >> -Alex >> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On 11/29/2012 02:37 PM, Alex Elder wrote: >>>>> On 11/22/2012 12:04 PM, Nick Bartos wrote: >>>>>> Here are the ceph log messages (including the libceph kernel debug >>>>>> stuff you asked for) from a node boot with the rbd command hung for a >>>>>> couple of minutes: >>>> >>>> I'm sorry, but I did something stupid... >>>> >>>> Yes, the branch I gave you includes these fixes. However >>>> it does *not* include the commit that was giving you trouble >>>> to begin with. >>>> >>>> So... >>>> >>>> I have updated that same branch (wip-nick) to contain: >>>> - Linux 3.5.5 >>>> - Plus the first *50* (not 49) patches you listed >>>> - Plus the ones I added before. >>>> >>>> The new commit id for that branch begins with be3198d6. >>>> >>>> I'm really sorry for this mistake. Please try this new >>>> branch and report back what you find. >>>> >>>> -Alex >>>> >>>> >>>>> Nick, I have put together a branch that includes two fixes >>>>> that might be helpful. I don't expect these fixes will >>>>> necessarily *fix* what you're seeing, but one of them >>>>> pulls a big hunk of processing out of the picture and >>>>> might help eliminate some potential causes. I had to >>>>> pull in several other patches as prerequisites in order >>>>> to get those fixes to apply cleanly. >>>>> >>>>> Would you be able to give it a try, and let us know what >>>>> results you get? The branch contains: >>>>> - Linux 3.5.5 >>>>> - Plus the first 49 patches you listed >>>>> - Plus four patches, which are prerequisites... >>>>> libceph: define ceph_extract_encoded_string() >>>>> rbd: define some new format constants >>>>> rbd: define rbd_dev_image_id() >>>>> rbd: kill create_snap sysfs entry >>>>> - ...for these two bug fixes: >>>>> libceph: remove 'osdtimeout' option >>>>> ceph: don't reference req after put >>>>> >>>>> The branch is available in the ceph-client git repository >>>>> under the name "wip-nick" and has commit id dd9323aa. >>>>> https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client/tree/wip-nick >>>>> >>>>>> https://raw.github.com/gist/4132395/7cb5f0150179b012429c6e57749120dd88616cce/gistfile1.txt >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This full debug output is very helpful. Please supply >>>>> that again as well. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> -Alex >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:49 PM, Nick Bartos <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> It's very easy to reproduce now with my automated install script, the >>>>>>> most I've seen it succeed with that patch is 2 in a row, and hanging >>>>>>> on the 3rd, although it hangs on most builds. So it shouldn't take >>>>>>> much to get it to do it again. I'll try and get to that tomorrow, >>>>>>> when I'm a bit more rested and my brain is working better. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes during this the OSDs are probably all syncing up. All the osd >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> mon daemons have started by the time the rdb commands are ran, >>>>>>> though. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012, Nick Bartos wrote: >>>>>>>>> FYI the build which included all 3.5 backports except patch #50 is >>>>>>>>> still going strong after 21 builds. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Okay, that one at least makes some sense. I've opened >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://tracker.newdream.net/issues/3519 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> How easy is this to reproduce? If it is something you can >>>>>>>> trigger with >>>>>>>> debugging enabled ('echo module libceph +p > >>>>>>>> /sys/kernel/debug/dynamic_debug/control') that would help >>>>>>>> tremendously. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm guessing that during this startup time the OSDs are still in the >>>>>>>> process of starting? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alex, I bet that a test that does a lot of map/unmap stuff in a >>>>>>>> loop while >>>>>>>> thrashing OSDs could hit this. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>> sage >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Nick Bartos >>>>>>>>> <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> With 8 successful installs already done, I'm reasonably >>>>>>>>>> confident that >>>>>>>>>> it's patch #50. I'm making another build which applies all >>>>>>>>>> patches >>>>>>>>>> from the 3.5 backport branch, excluding that specific one. >>>>>>>>>> I'll let >>>>>>>>>> you know if that turns up any unexpected failures. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What will the potential fall out be for removing that specific >>>>>>>>>> patch? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Nick Bartos >>>>>>>>>> <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> It's really looking like it's the >>>>>>>>>>> libceph_resubmit_linger_ops_when_pg_mapping_changes commit. When >>>>>>>>>>> patches 1-50 (listed below) are applied to 3.5.7, the hang is >>>>>>>>>>> present. >>>>>>>>>>> So far I have gone through 4 successful installs with no >>>>>>>>>>> hang with >>>>>>>>>>> only 1-49 applied. I'm still leaving my test run to make sure >>>>>>>>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>>> not a fluke, but since previously it hangs within the first >>>>>>>>>>> couple of >>>>>>>>>>> builds, it really looks like this is where the problem >>>>>>>>>>> originated. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 1-libceph_eliminate_connection_state_DEAD.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 2-libceph_kill_bad_proto_ceph_connection_op.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 3-libceph_rename_socket_callbacks.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 4-libceph_rename_kvec_reset_and_kvec_add_functions.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 5-libceph_embed_ceph_messenger_structure_in_ceph_client.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 6-libceph_start_separating_connection_flags_from_state.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 7-libceph_start_tracking_connection_socket_state.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 8-libceph_provide_osd_number_when_creating_osd.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 9-libceph_set_CLOSED_state_bit_in_con_init.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 10-libceph_embed_ceph_connection_structure_in_mon_client.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 11-libceph_drop_connection_refcounting_for_mon_client.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 12-libceph_init_monitor_connection_when_opening.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 13-libceph_fully_initialize_connection_in_con_init.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 14-libceph_tweak_ceph_alloc_msg.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 15-libceph_have_messages_point_to_their_connection.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 16-libceph_have_messages_take_a_connection_reference.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 17-libceph_make_ceph_con_revoke_a_msg_operation.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 18-libceph_make_ceph_con_revoke_message_a_msg_op.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 19-libceph_fix_overflow_in___decode_pool_names.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 20-libceph_fix_overflow_in_osdmap_decode.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 21-libceph_fix_overflow_in_osdmap_apply_incremental.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 22-libceph_transition_socket_state_prior_to_actual_connect.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 23-libceph_fix_NULL_dereference_in_reset_connection.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 24-libceph_use_con_get_put_methods.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 25-libceph_drop_ceph_con_get_put_helpers_and_nref_member.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 26-libceph_encapsulate_out_message_data_setup.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 27-libceph_encapsulate_advancing_msg_page.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 28-libceph_don_t_mark_footer_complete_before_it_is.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 29-libceph_move_init_bio__functions_up.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 30-libceph_move_init_of_bio_iter.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 31-libceph_don_t_use_bio_iter_as_a_flag.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 32-libceph_SOCK_CLOSED_is_a_flag_not_a_state.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 33-libceph_don_t_change_socket_state_on_sock_event.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 34-libceph_just_set_SOCK_CLOSED_when_state_changes.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 35-libceph_don_t_touch_con_state_in_con_close_socket.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 36-libceph_clear_CONNECTING_in_ceph_con_close.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 37-libceph_clear_NEGOTIATING_when_done.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 38-libceph_define_and_use_an_explicit_CONNECTED_state.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 39-libceph_separate_banner_and_connect_writes.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 40-libceph_distinguish_two_phases_of_connect_sequence.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 41-libceph_small_changes_to_messenger.c.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 42-libceph_add_some_fine_ASCII_art.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 43-libceph_set_peer_name_on_con_open_not_init.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 44-libceph_initialize_mon_client_con_only_once.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 45-libceph_allow_sock_transition_from_CONNECTING_to_CLOSED.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 46-libceph_initialize_msgpool_message_types.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 47-libceph_prevent_the_race_of_incoming_work_during_teardown.patch >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 48-libceph_report_socket_read_write_error_message.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 49-libceph_fix_mutex_coverage_for_ceph_con_close.patch >>>>>>>>>>> 50-libceph_resubmit_linger_ops_when_pg_mapping_changes.patch >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for hunting this down. I'm very curious what the >>>>>>>>>>>> culprit is... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> sage >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
