On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 04:31:23PM -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote: > Hi Mike, > > On 9/10/24 3:14 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 12:45:11PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 04:34:18PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >>> On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 03:31:41PM -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote: > >>>> Hi Mike, > >>>> > >>>> I've been running tests on localio this afternoon after finishing up going through v15 of the patches (I was most of the way through when you posted v16, so I haven't updated yet!). Cthon tests passed on all NFS versions, and xfstests passed on NFS v4.x. However, I saw this crash from xfstests with NFS v3: > >>>> > >>>> [ 1502.440896] run fstests generic/633 at 2024-09-06 14:04:17 > >>>> [ 1502.694356] process 'vfstest' launched '/dev/fd/4/file1' with NULL argv: empty string added > >>>> [ 1502.699514] Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0x6c616e69665f6140: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI > >>>> [ 1502.700970] CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 513 Comm: nfsd Not tainted 6.11.0-rc6-g0c79a48cd64d-dirty+ #42323 70d41673e6cbf8e3437eb227e0a9c3c46ed3b289 > >>>> [ 1502.702506] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS unknown 2/2/2022 > >>>> [ 1502.703593] RIP: 0010:nfsd_cache_lookup+0x2b3/0x840 [nfsd] > > > > <snip> > > > >>>> > >>>> Please let me know if there are any other details you need about my setup to help debug this! > >>> > >>> Hmm, I haven't seen this issue, my runs of xfstests with LOCALIO > >>> enabled look solid: > >>> https://evilpiepirate.org/~testdashboard/ci?user=snitzer&branch=snitm-nfs-next&test=^fs.nfs.fstests.generic.633$ > >>> > >>> And I know Chuck has been testing xfstests and more with the patches > >>> applied but LOCALIO disabled in his kernel config. > >>> > >>> The stack seems to indicate nfsd is just handling a request (so it > >>> isn't using LOCALIO, at least not for this op). > >>> > >>> Probably best if you do try v16. v15 has issues v16 addressed. If > >>> you can reproduce with v16 please share your kernel .config and > >>> xfstests config. > >>> > >>> Note that I've only really tested my changes against v6.11-rc4. But I > >>> can rebase on v6.11-rc6 if you find v16 still fails for you. > >> > >> Hi Anna, > >> > >> Just checking back, how is LOCALIO for you at this point? Anything > >> you're continuing to see as an issue or need from me? > > > > In case it helps, I did just rebase LOCALIO (v16 + 1 fix) ontop of > > cel/nfsd-next (v6.11-rc6 based), and I've pushed the result here: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/snitzer/linux.git/log/?h=nfs-localio-for-next > > I'm seeing the same hang on generic/525 with your latest branch. > > Anna Interesting, I just looked at ktest and it shows the regression point to be this commit: nfs: implement client support for NFS_LOCALIO_PROGRAM See: https://evilpiepirate.org/~testdashboard/ci?user=snitzer&branch=snitm-nfs-next&test=^fs.nfs.fstests.generic.525$ I think 525 has been like this for a while, really not sure why I ignored it... will dig deeper! Thanks, Mike
