xfstests: device busy when umount

xfstests: device busy when umount

[Yongqiang Yang]

Hi,

I noticed that all tests which contain 'device busy' errors have
falloc operations.  Does the error have something to do with falloc?

-- 
Best Wishes
Yongqiang Yang

Re: xfstests: device busy when umount

[Amir Goldstein]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I noticed that all tests which contain 'device busy' errors have
>>> falloc operations.  Does the error have something to do with falloc?
>>
>> it might. Do you also get the device is busy errors??
> Yes,  all of them have falloc operations.


Interesting. I wonder why other people don't get these errors (or report them)
Which distro are you using at the moment?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: xfstests: device busy when umount

[Yongqiang Yang]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I noticed that all tests which contain 'device busy' errors have
>>>> falloc operations.  Does the error have something to do with falloc?
>>>
>>> it might. Do you also get the device is busy errors??
>> Yes,  all of them have falloc operations.
>
>
> Interesting. I wonder why other people don't get these errors (or report them)
> Which distro are you using at the moment?
I am using Debian distro.
>



-- 
Best Wishes
Yongqiang Yang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: xfstests: device busy when umount

[Eric Sandeen]

On 5/17/11 4:03 AM, Yongqiang Yang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I noticed that all tests which contain 'device busy' errors have
> falloc operations.  Does the error have something to do with falloc?
> 

cc'ing xfs list since xfs devs maintain xfstests.

What tests have "device busy" errors?  What do the usual investigative
steps such as "lsof" and "fuser" tell you when this happens?

Are there loop devices that didn't get cleaned up, or processes that
have not terminated?

What tests have these problems?

-Eric

Re: xfstests: device busy when umount

[Amir Goldstein]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 5/17/11 4:03 AM, Yongqiang Yang wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I noticed that all tests which contain 'device busy' errors have
>> falloc operations.  Does the error have something to do with falloc?
>>
>
> cc'ing xfs list since xfs devs maintain xfstests.
>
> What tests have "device busy" errors?  What do the usual investigative
> steps such as "lsof" and "fuser" tell you when this happens?

I tried running lsof | grep $TEST_DIR before umount
and I tried sleep 1 before umount and it didn't yield anything.

>
> Are there loop devices that didn't get cleaned up, or processes that
> have not terminated?
>
> What tests have these problems?

for me 124 always fails to umount, and 198 and 213 sometimes fails to umount.

>
> -Eric
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: xfstests: device busy when umount

[Dave Chinner]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 06:01:14PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 5/17/11 4:03 AM, Yongqiang Yang wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I noticed that all tests which contain 'device busy' errors have
> >> falloc operations.  Does the error have something to do with falloc?

<shrug>

Perhaps a bit more detail about what you are testing, how you've set
up xfstests, etc, and some analysis of the problem is in order first?

> > cc'ing xfs list since xfs devs maintain xfstests.
> >
> > What tests have "device busy" errors?  What do the usual investigative
> > steps such as "lsof" and "fuser" tell you when this happens?
> 
> I tried running lsof | grep $TEST_DIR before umount
> and I tried sleep 1 before umount and it didn't yield anything.

Which usually indicates that you've got some kind of reference
counting problem preventing the filesystem from being unmounted.

> > Are there loop devices that didn't get cleaned up, or processes that
> > have not terminated?
> >
> > What tests have these problems?
> 
> for me 124 always fails to umount, and 198 and 213 sometimes fails to umount.

What, exactly, are you testing on? test 124 uses XFS_IOC_RESVSP
directly, not fallocate(), so all it is doing on a non-XFS
filesystem is iterating a loop that writes a 1MB file, reads it back
then unlinks it....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: xfstests: device busy when umount

[Amir Goldstein]

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 06:01:14PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > On 5/17/11 4:03 AM, Yongqiang Yang wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I noticed that all tests which contain 'device busy' errors have
>> >> falloc operations.  Does the error have something to do with falloc?
>
> <shrug>
>
> Perhaps a bit more detail about what you are testing, how you've set
> up xfstests, etc, and some analysis of the problem is in order first?

<shrug>^2

Let me make it simple:

amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ uname -a
Linux qalab 2.6.39-rc7+ #11 SMP Mon May 16 12:08:52 IDT 2011 x86_64
x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ mount -t ext4
/dev/sdb1 on / type ext4 (rw,errors=remount-ro,commit=0)
/dev/sda5 on /mnt/test/ext4 type ext4 (rw,acl,user_xattr)
amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ cat local.config
export DISABLE_UDF_TEST=1
export TEST_DEV=/dev/sda5
export TEST_DIR=/mnt/test/ext4
export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/sda8
export SCRATCH_MNT=/mnt/test/scratch
amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ sudo ./check 124
FSTYP         -- ext4
PLATFORM      -- Linux/x86_64 qalab 2.6.39-rc7+
MKFS_OPTIONS  -- /dev/sda8
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o acl,user_xattr /dev/sda8 /mnt/test/scratch

124 9s ... - output mismatch (see 124.out.bad)
--- 124.out     2011-03-01 18:00:49.808338003 +0200
+++ 124.out.bad 2011-05-18 10:47:01.830998615 +0300
@@ -1 +1,4 @@
 QA output created by 124
+umount: /mnt/test/scratch: device is busy.
+        (In some cases useful info about processes that use
+         the device is found by lsof(8) or fuser(1))
Ran: 124
Failures: 124
Failed 1 of 1 tests
amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ mount -t ext4
/dev/sdb1 on / type ext4 (rw,errors=remount-ro,commit=0)
/dev/sda8 on /mnt/test/scratch type ext4 (rw,acl,user_xattr)
/dev/sda5 on /mnt/test/ext4 type ext4 (rw,acl,user_xattr)
amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ sudo umount /mnt/test/scratch/
amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ mount -t ext4
/dev/sdb1 on / type ext4 (rw,errors=remount-ro,commit=0)
/dev/sda5 on /mnt/test/ext4 type ext4 (rw,acl,user_xattr)

I am not trying anything special.
Running umount from command line after the test succeeds, so it must
be some kind of race.
As I said, I tried running lsof before umount in common.rc, but it
detected nothing.
Do you have any suggestions for further analysis?

>
>> > cc'ing xfs list since xfs devs maintain xfstests.
>> >
>> > What tests have "device busy" errors?  What do the usual investigative
>> > steps such as "lsof" and "fuser" tell you when this happens?
>>
>> I tried running lsof | grep $TEST_DIR before umount
>> and I tried sleep 1 before umount and it didn't yield anything.
>
> Which usually indicates that you've got some kind of reference
> counting problem preventing the filesystem from being unmounted.

As I demonstrated, the filesystem *can* be unmounted.

>
>> > Are there loop devices that didn't get cleaned up, or processes that
>> > have not terminated?
>> >
>> > What tests have these problems?
>>
>> for me 124 always fails to umount, and 198 and 213 sometimes fails to umount.
>
> What, exactly, are you testing on? test 124 uses XFS_IOC_RESVSP
> directly, not fallocate(), so all it is doing on a non-XFS
> filesystem is iterating a loop that writes a 1MB file, reads it back
> then unlinks it....
>

Tell me about it...

The machine was a clean install of Ubuntu 10.10,
which was recently upgraded to Ubuntu 11.4, but this problem
existed since the beginning.

It is used for nothing but running tests and I only
installed packages required (to my understanding) by xfstests.
I just build xfstests from git (HEAD 30456902).

The kernel is latest 2.6.39-rc7 with ext4 dev branch changed,
but again, the problem existed with any previous/release kernel I tried.

Cheers,
Amir.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html