On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 01:49:49PM +0800, Hugo Kuo wrote: > Hi XFS team, > > > Here's the lsof output of the grouped result of any openfile happens on > problematic disks. The full log of xfs_repair -n is included in this gist > as well. The xfs_repair recommend to contact xfs mailing list in the end of > the command. > > https://gist.github.com/HugoKuo/95613d7864aa0a1343615642b3309451 > > Perhaps I should go ahead to reboot the machine and run the xfs_repair > again. Please find my answers inlines. > Yes, repair is crashing in this case. Best to try xfs_repair after you've rebooted and mounted/umounted the fs to replay the log. If it's still crashing at that point, we'll probably want a metadata image of the fs, if possible (though there's a good chance a newer xfsprogs has the problem fixed). > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:34 AM, Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > So there's definitely some traces waiting on AGF locks and whatnot, but > > also many traces that appear to be waiting on I/O. For example: > > > > Yes, those I/O waiting is the original problem of this thread. It looks > like the disk was locked. All these I/O waiting for same disk (a multipath > entry). > > > > > > kernel: swift-object- D 0000000000000008 0 2096 1605 0x00000000 > > kernel: ffff8877cc2378b8 0000000000000082 ffff8877cc237818 ffff887ff016eb68 > > kernel: ffff883fd4ab6b28 0000000000000046 ffff883fd4bd9400 00000001e7ea49d0 > > kernel: ffff8877cc237848 ffffffff812735d1 ffff885fa2e4a5f8 ffff8877cc237fd8 > > kernel: Call Trace: > > kernel: [<ffffffff812735d1>] ? __blk_run_queue+0x31/0x40 > > kernel: [<ffffffff81539455>] schedule_timeout+0x215/0x2e0 > > kernel: [<ffffffff812757c9>] ? blk_peek_request+0x189/0x210 > > kernel: [<ffffffff8126d9b3>] ? elv_queue_empty+0x33/0x40 > > kernel: [<ffffffffa00040a0>] ? dm_request_fn+0x240/0x340 [dm_mod] > > kernel: [<ffffffff815390d3>] wait_for_common+0x123/0x180 > > kernel: [<ffffffff810672b0>] ? default_wake_function+0x0/0x20 > > kernel: [<ffffffffa0001036>] ? dm_unplug_all+0x36/0x50 [dm_mod] > > kernel: [<ffffffffa0415b56>] ? _xfs_buf_read+0x46/0x60 [xfs] > > kernel: [<ffffffffa040b417>] ? xfs_trans_read_buf+0x197/0x410 [xfs] > > kernel: [<ffffffff815391ed>] wait_for_completion+0x1d/0x20 > > kernel: [<ffffffffa041503b>] xfs_buf_iowait+0x9b/0x100 [xfs] > > kernel: [<ffffffffa040b417>] ? xfs_trans_read_buf+0x197/0x410 [xfs] > > kernel: [<ffffffffa0415b56>] _xfs_buf_read+0x46/0x60 [xfs] > > kernel: [<ffffffffa0415c1b>] xfs_buf_read+0xab/0x100 [xfs] > > > > > > Are all of these swift processes running against independent storage, or > > one big array? Also, can you tell (e.g., with iotop) whether progress is > > being made here, albiet very slowly, or if the storage is indeed locked > > up..? > > > > There're 240+ swift processes in running. > All stuck swift processes were attempting to access same disk. I can > confirm it's indeed locked rather than slowly. By monitoring io via iotop. > There's 0 activity one the problematic mount point. > > > > In any event, given the I/O hangs, the fact that you're on an old distro > > kernel and you have things like multipath enabled, it might be > > worthwhile to see if you can rule out any multipath issues. > > > > > To upgrade the kernel for CentOS6.5 may not the option for the time being > but it definitely worth to give it try by picking up one of nodes for > testing later. As for the multipath, yes I did suspect some mystery problem > with multipath + XFS under a certain loading. But it's more like a XFS and > inode related hence I start to investigate from XFS. If there's no chance > to move forward in XFS, I might break the multipath and observe the result > for awhile. > It's hard to pinpoint something to the fs when there's a bunch of hung I/Os. You probably want to track down the source of those problems first. Brian > > > > > 'umount -l' doesn't necessarily force anything. It just lazily unmounts > > the fs from the namespace and cleans up the mount once all references > > are dropped. I suspect the fs is still mounted internally. > > > > Brian > > > > > Thanks // Hugo _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
