From: Jiufei Xue <jiufei.xue@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>,
"aglo@umich.edu" <aglo@umich.edu>
Cc: "bfields@fieldses.org" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
"Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com" <Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com" <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [bug report] task hang while testing xfstests generic/323
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 00:34:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1edd3a2c-b42d-b0eb-0c52-9e564b5282d7@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ce839197cb70f3bc75413ed2e54f8baafafc01dd.camel@hammerspace.com>
Hi Trond,
On 2019/3/1 下午9:08, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-03-01 at 16:49 +0800, Jiufei Xue wrote:
>>
>> On 2019/3/1 下午1:08, Jiufei Xue wrote:
>>> Hi Olga,
>>>
>>> On 2019/3/1 上午6:26, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 5:11 AM Jiufei Xue <
>>>> jiufei.xue@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> when I tested xfstests/generic/323 with NFSv4.1 and v4.2, the
>>>>> task
>>>>> changed to zombie occasionally while a thread is hanging with
>>>>> the
>>>>> following stack:
>>>>>
>>>>> [<0>] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x1e/0xa0 [sunrpc]
>>>>> [<0>] nfs4_do_close+0x21b/0x2c0 [nfsv4]
>>>>> [<0>] __put_nfs_open_context+0xa2/0x110 [nfs]
>>>>> [<0>] nfs_file_release+0x35/0x50 [nfs]
>>>>> [<0>] __fput+0xa2/0x1c0
>>>>> [<0>] task_work_run+0x82/0xa0
>>>>> [<0>] do_exit+0x2ac/0xc20
>>>>> [<0>] do_group_exit+0x39/0xa0
>>>>> [<0>] get_signal+0x1ce/0x5d0
>>>>> [<0>] do_signal+0x36/0x620
>>>>> [<0>] exit_to_usermode_loop+0x5e/0xc2
>>>>> [<0>] do_syscall_64+0x16c/0x190
>>>>> [<0>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>>>>> [<0>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>>>>>
>>>>> Since commit 12f275cdd163(NFSv4: Retry CLOSE and DELEGRETURN on
>>>>> NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID), the client will retry to close the file
>>>>> when
>>>>> stateid generation number in client is lower than server.
>>>>>
>>>>> The original intention of this commit is retrying the operation
>>>>> while
>>>>> racing with an OPEN. However, in this case the stateid
>>>>> generation remains
>>>>> mismatch forever.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>
>>>> Can you include a network trace of the failure? Is it possible
>>>> that
>>>> the server has crashed on reply to the close and that's why the
>>>> task
>>>> is hung? What server are you testing against?
>>>>
>>> I am testing the local server, the testcase is attached below.
>>>
>>> # uname -r
>>> 5.0.0-rc8
>>>
>>> # cat /etc/exports
>>> /mnt/vdd *(rw,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)
>>>
>>> # cat test.sh
>>> mount /dev/vdd /mnt/vdd
>>> systemctl start nfs
>>> mount -t nfs -o rw,relatime,vers=4.1 127.0.0.1:/mnt/vdd
>>> /mnt/nfsscratch
>>>
>>> for ((i=0;i<10000;i++))
>>> do
>>> echo "loop $i started"
>>> /usr/local/xfstests/src/aio-dio-regress/aio-last-ref-held-
>>> by-io 1 100 /mnt/nfsscratch/aio-testfile
>>> sleep 5
>>> done
>>>
>>> The command aio-last-ref-held-by-io from xfstests will spawn 100
>>> threads. Each thread
>>> repeated doing open/io_submit/close/io_getevents/io_destroy until
>>> the parent exist
>>> because of timeout.
>>>
>>>
>>> Here is the log when the task hung.
>>>
>>> [10841.121523] nfs4_close_prepare: begin!
>>> [10841.121526] --> nfs4_alloc_slot used_slots=0000
>>> highest_used=4294967295 max_slots=10
>>> [10841.121528] <-- nfs4_alloc_slot used_slots=0001 highest_used=0
>>> slotid=0
>>> [10841.121530] nfs4_close_prepare: done!
>>> [10841.121536] encode_sequence: sessionid=1551405749:3822331530:1:0
>>> seqid=59495845 slotid=0 max_slotid=0 cache_this=1
>>> [10841.121583] nfsd_dispatch: vers 4 proc 1
>>> [10841.121588] __find_in_sessionid_hashtbl:
>>> 1551405749:3822331530:1:0
>>> [10841.121590] nfsd4_sequence: slotid 0
>>> [10841.121592] check_slot_seqid enter. seqid 59495845 slot_seqid
>>> 59495844
>>> [10841.121596] nfsd: fh_verify(28: 01060001 0c66c6db d74ea4c9
>>> 61e12d9e c03beba6 0000000b)
>>> [10841.121607] nfsd: fh_verify(28: 01060001 0c66c6db d74ea4c9
>>> 61e12d9e c03beba6 0000000b)
>>> [10841.121613] NFSD: nfsd4_close on file aio-testfile
>>> [10841.121615] NFSD: nfs4_preprocess_seqid_op: seqid=0 stateid =
>>> (5c7892b5/e3d4268a/000ab905/0000746b)
>>> [10841.121619] nfsv4 compound returned 10024
>>> [10841.121621] --> nfsd4_store_cache_entry slot 00000000f540ddd9
>>> [10841.121625] renewing client (clientid 5c7892b5/e3d4268a)
>>> [10841.122526] decode_attr_type: type=00
>>> ......
>>> [10841.122558] nfs4_close_done: begin!
>>> [10841.122561] --> nfs4_alloc_slot used_slots=0001 highest_used=0
>>> max_slots=10
>>> [10841.122564] <-- nfs4_alloc_slot used_slots=0003 highest_used=1
>>> slotid=1
>>> [10841.122566] nfs4_free_slot: slotid 1 highest_used_slotid 0
>>> [10841.122568] nfs41_sequence_process: Error 0 free the slot
>>> [10841.122571] nfs4_free_slot: slotid 0 highest_used_slotid
>>> 4294967295
>>> [10841.122575] nfs4_close_done: done, ret = 0!
>>> [10841.122584] nfs4_close_prepare: begin!
>>> ......
>>> Client keep retry the CLOSE.
>>>
>>>> I have seen trace where close would get ERR_OLD_STATEID and would
>>>> still retry with the same open state until it got a reply to the
>>>> OPEN
>>>> which changed the state and when the client received reply to
>>>> that,
>>>> it'll retry the CLOSE with the updated stateid.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, you are right. I have also noticed that. But what happened if
>>> the
>>> OPEN task exit receiving a signal? How can a client update the
>>> stateid?
>>>
>
> static void nfs4_open_release(void *calldata)
> {
> struct
> nfs4_opendata *data = calldata;
> struct nfs4_state *state = NULL;
>
> /* If this request hasn't been cancelled, do nothing */
> if (!data->cancelled)
> goto out_free;
> /* In case of error, no cleanup! */
> if (data->rpc_status != 0 || !data->rpc_done)
> goto out_free;
> /* In case we need an open_confirm, no cleanup! */
> if (data->o_res.rflags & NFS4_OPEN_RESULT_CONFIRM)
> goto out_free;
> state = nfs4_opendata_to_nfs4_state(data);
> if (!IS_ERR(state))
> nfs4_close_state(state, data->o_arg.fmode);
> out_free:
> nfs4_opendata_put(data);
> }
>
> Note what happens when the 'data->cancelled' flag is set. This is why
> we always ensure that stateful operations such as OPEN, and LOCK,...
> are run as asynchronous RPC tasks.
> OPEN_DOWNGRADE, CLOSE and LOCKU are also asynchronous, but they are
> inherently safe against signals since they do not establish new state
> that needs to be torn down.
>
Thank you for your correction. I have not noted that before. However,
the problem can still be reproduced on 5.0.0-rc8. I found that server
bumped the last seqid in function nfsd4_process_open2(), while not keeping
the client updated for some reasons.
Thanks,
Jiufei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-02 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-28 10:10 [bug report] task hang while testing xfstests generic/323 Jiufei Xue
2019-02-28 22:26 ` Olga Kornievskaia
2019-02-28 23:56 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-03-01 5:19 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-01 5:08 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-01 8:49 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-01 13:08 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-03-02 16:34 ` Jiufei Xue [this message]
2019-03-04 15:20 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-04 15:50 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-03-05 5:09 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-05 14:45 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-03-06 9:59 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-06 16:09 ` bfields
2019-03-10 22:20 ` Olga Kornievskaia
2019-03-11 14:30 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-03-11 15:07 ` Olga Kornievskaia
2019-03-11 15:13 ` Olga Kornievskaia
2019-03-15 6:30 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-15 20:33 ` Olga Kornievskaia
2019-03-15 20:55 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-03-16 14:11 ` Jiufei Xue
2019-03-19 15:33 ` Olga Kornievskaia
2019-03-11 15:12 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-03-11 15:14 ` Olga Kornievskaia
2019-03-11 15:28 ` Trond Myklebust
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1edd3a2c-b42d-b0eb-0c52-9e564b5282d7@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=jiufei.xue@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com \
--cc=aglo@umich.edu \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trondmy@hammerspace.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox