[Linux-cluster] gfs2 blocking tasks
Bart Verwilst
lists at verwilst.be
Wed Aug 22 12:34:51 UTC 2012
Hi Steven,
I have just tested this kernel:
http://people.canonical.com/~apw/lp1020207-precise/
Which contains 2 patches,
0001-GFS2-More-automated-code-analysis-fixes.patch and
0002-GFS2-Read-in-rindex-if-necessary-during-unlink.patch. This will
probably be included into the latest stable kernel of Ubuntu 12.04.
Works perfectly now, can't reproduce this bug anymore.
What's next to push this to -stable?
Bart
Steven Whitehouse schreef op 22.08.2012 10:44:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 09:35 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>> Hi Steven,
>>
>> I'm not sure if this is enough to fix it in 3.2:
>>
>> --- inode.c.orig 2012-08-22 07:28:15.675859475 +0000
>> +++ inode.c 2012-08-22 07:33:05.895865014 +0000
>> @@ -1039,6 +1039,10 @@
>> struct gfs2_rgrpd *rgd;
>> int error;
>>
>> + error = gfs2_rindex_update(sdp);
>> + if (error)
>> + return error;
>> +
>> gfs2_holder_init(dip->i_gl, LM_ST_EXCLUSIVE, 0, ghs);
>> gfs2_holder_init(ip->i_gl, LM_ST_EXCLUSIVE, 0, ghs + 1);
>>
>> I've left off the "if (!rgd) { ... }" part since out_inodes doesn't
>> exist yet there, so it seemed unneeded. I'm far from a kernel
>> developer
>> though, so please give your OK for this, so i can try to push it
>> into
>> Ubuntu and/or upstream.
>>
>> Bart
>>
> It may well be enough. If we can verify that, then I'm happy to ACK
> this
> for -stable,
>
> Steve.
>
>> Bart Verwilst schreef op 21.08.2012 22:35:
>> > Hi Steven,
>> >
>> > I've tested with kernel 3.3 (
>> > http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v3.3-precise/ ), bug
>> > isnt present there. Tried with 3.2.28 ( also from the kernel-ppa
>> ),
>> > and bug happens there. In the end i was idd able to trace it back
>> to
>> > 3.3-rc6, where you pushed a couple of GFS2 patches upstream.
>> >
>> > inode.c for example is quite different between 3.2.28 and 3.3-rc1,
>> > and i do not dare to hack myself a diff file that incorporates
>> your
>> > change, fearing it will probably be less stable than it is
>> already.
>> > :)
>> >
>> > Would it be too much to ask to backport your change to 3.2.x? I
>> will
>> > then test this, and try to push it upstream to -stable and/or
>> ubuntu
>> > LTS..
>> >
>> > Thanks a lot in advance!
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Bart
>> >
>> > Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 14:37:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 14:23 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>> >>> Hi Steven,
>> >>>
>> >>> The kernel of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS is based on 3.2.0, while the
>> patch
>> >>> you
>> >>> mentioned seems to be for a newer(?) version.
>> >>> What should I do, offer an altered version of this patch for
>> >>> inclusion
>> >>> into Ubuntu's 3.2.0 kernel, or is it a little less
>> straightforward
>> >>> than
>> >>> this? :)
>> >>>
>> >>> Kind regards,
>> >>>
>> >>> Bart
>> >>>
>> >> Well, since you've not got that patch in your existing kernel,
>> then
>> >> there are really two issues here. Firstly to try and verify that
>> >> this
>> >> patch really is a fix for the problem, and then to figure out
>> what
>> >> needs
>> >> to be done wrt Ubuntu distro kernels. One solution may be to post
>> it
>> >> for
>> >> the upstream -stable kernel as I think most distros will then
>> pick
>> >> this
>> >> up.
>> >>
>> >> Are you able to build a new Ubuntu kernel with that patch in it?
>> >> That
>> >> would be one way to test it. Another way which doesn't require
>> >> building
>> >> kernels is this:
>> >>
>> >> The problem occurs when the resource groups are not uptodate, and
>> >> various actions taken on the filesystem will ensure that they are
>> >> uptodate. Mounting a filesystem and immediately running an unlink
>> of
>> >> a
>> >> file which is known to exist on the filesystem (before performing
>> >> any
>> >> other action) should trigger that bug if it is present.
>> >>
>> >> It may not be that particular bug, but that looks the most likely
>> of
>> >> any
>> >> recent patch to that bit of code. Are you able to try a more
>> recent
>> >> Ubuntu kernel? If you could try one based on a more recent
>> upstream
>> >> which has that patch in it, then that might also help narrow down
>> >> the
>> >> problem,
>> >>
>> >> Steve.
>> >>
>> >>> Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 13:27:
>> >>> > Hi,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 13:03 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>> >>> >> Hi Steven,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> There is no drbd in the mix ( which is why i changed the
>> title
>> >>> of
>> >>> >> the
>> >>> >> bugreport now ). I'm only using plain iSCSI. The original
>> posted
>> >>> had
>> >>> >> it
>> >>> >> with drbd :)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Kind regards,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Bart
>> >>> >>
>> >>> > Ah, I see sorry.. I misunderstood the report. I wonder whether
>> >>> your
>> >>> > distro kernel has this patch:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=718b97bd6b03445be53098e3c8f896aeebc304aa
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Thats the most likely thing that I can see that has been fixed
>> >>> > recently,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Steve.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 12:59:
>> >>> >> > Hi,
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:39 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>> >>> >> >> Hi Steven
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Shared storage is iSCSI,
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> <totem rrp_mode="none" secauth="off" token="20000"/>
>> >>> >> >> <quorumd tko="4" interval="2"
>> >>> >> >> device="/dev/mapper/iscsi_cluster_quorum"></quorumd>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Actually i know why this is happening now, and can
>> reproduce
>> >>> 100%
>> >>> >> of
>> >>> >> >> the time, i've added my findings as a comment to this bug
>> >>> from
>> >>> >> >> somebody
>> >>> >> >> having the same problem:
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>>
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gfs2-utils/+bug/1020207
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Create file on one node's gfs2 mount, rm on the other ->
>> >>> hanging
>> >>> >> >> mountpoint + kernel OOPS.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Happy that i'm finally getting somewhere with this :P
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Anything i can do to help Steven?
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Kind regards,
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Bart Verwilst
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> > Can you reproduce this without drbd in the mix? That should
>> >>> remove
>> >>> >> > one
>> >>> >> > complication and make this easier to track down.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > I'll take a look at see what that dereference is likely to
>> be
>> >>> in
>> >>> >> the
>> >>> >> > mean time,
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Steve.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >> Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 12:17:
>> >>> >> >> > Hi,
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:08 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>> >>> >> >> >> As yet another reply to my own post, i found this on
>> the
>> >>> node
>> >>> >> >> where
>> >>> >> >> >> it
>> >>> >> >> >> hangs ( this time it's vm01, and
>> /var/lib/libvirt/sanlock
>> >>> >> that's
>> >>> >> >> >> hanging
>> >>> >> >> >> ):
>> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.640653] GFS2: fsid=: Trying to join cluster
>> >>> "lock_dlm",
>> >>> >> >> >> "kvm:sanlock"
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.660035] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: Joined
>> cluster.
>> >>> Now
>> >>> >> >> >> mounting
>> >>> >> >> >> FS...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.720108] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0, already
>> >>> locked
>> >>> >> >> for
>> >>> >> >> >> use
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.720113] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Looking
>> at
>> >>> >> >> >> journal...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772606] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0:
>> Acquiring
>> >>> the
>> >>> >> >> >> transaction lock...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772659] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0:
>> Replaying
>> >>> >> >> journal...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772675] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0:
>> Replayed 0
>> >>> of
>> >>> >> 0
>> >>> >> >> >> blocks
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772679] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Found 1
>> >>> revoke
>> >>> >> >> tags
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.782611] init: libvirt-bin main process ended,
>> >>> >> respawning
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.784161] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Journal
>> >>> >> replayed
>> >>> >> >> in
>> >>> >> >> >> 1s
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.784268] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Done
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.784329] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=1: Trying
>> to
>> >>> >> acquire
>> >>> >> >> >> journal lock...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.788349] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=1: Looking
>> at
>> >>> >> >> >> journal...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.886047] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=1: Done
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.886110] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Trying
>> to
>> >>> >> acquire
>> >>> >> >> >> journal lock...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.891121] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Looking
>> at
>> >>> >> >> >> journal...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.943994] init: ttyS1 main process (20318)
>> terminated
>> >>> >> with
>> >>> >> >> >> status
>> >>> >> >> >> 1
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.944037] init: ttyS1 main process ended,
>> respawning
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.967054] init: ttyS0 main process (20320)
>> terminated
>> >>> >> with
>> >>> >> >> >> status
>> >>> >> >> >> 1
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.967100] init: ttyS0 main process ended,
>> respawning
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.972037] ttyS0: LSR safety check engaged!
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1220.226027] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2:
>> Acquiring
>> >>> the
>> >>> >> >> >> transaction lock...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1220.226160] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2:
>> Replaying
>> >>> >> >> journal...
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1220.311801] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2:
>> Replayed 3
>> >>> of
>> >>> >> 106
>> >>> >> >> >> blocks
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1220.311805] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Found
>> 4487
>> >>> >> revoke
>> >>> >> >> >> tags
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1220.322148] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Journal
>> >>> >> replayed
>> >>> >> >> in
>> >>> >> >> >> 1s
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1220.322253] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Done
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > So that looks like it successfully recovered the
>> journals
>> >>> for
>> >>> >> >> nodes
>> >>> >> >> > one
>> >>> >> >> > and two. How many nodes are in the cluster? What is the
>> >>> fencing
>> >>> >> >> > quorum
>> >>> >> >> > set up being used?
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.457120] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL
>> pointer
>> >>> >> >> dereference
>> >>> >> >> >> at
>> >>> >> >> >> 0000000000000018
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > So this is a dereference of something which is 24 bytes
>> >>> into
>> >>> >> some
>> >>> >> >> > structure or other. Certainly something which should not
>> >>> happen
>> >>> >> so
>> >>> >> >> we
>> >>> >> >> > need to take a look at that.
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > Was this a one off, or something that you can reproduce?
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > Steve.
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.457508] IP: [<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>> >>> gfs2_unlink+0x8a/0x220
>> >>> >> >> >> [gfs2]
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.457958] PGD 2170f2067 PUD 20c0ff067 PMD 0
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.458197] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.458374] CPU 0
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.458460] Modules linked in: gfs2 dlm ipmi_si
>> mptctl
>> >>> >> mptbase
>> >>> >> >> >> ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler dell_rbu ip6table_filter
>> >>> >> ip6_tables
>> >>> >> >> >> iptable_filter ip_tables ebtable_nat ebtables x_tables
>> >>> >> kvm_intel
>> >>> >> >> kvm
>> >>> >> >> >> ocfs2_dlmfs ocfs2_stack_o2cb ocfs2_dlm
>> ocfs2_nodemanager
>> >>> >> >> >> ocfs2_stackglue
>> >>> >> >> >> configfs dm_round_robin ib_iser bridge rdma_cm ib_cm
>> iw_cm
>> >>> >> ib_sa
>> >>> >> >> >> ib_mad
>> >>> >> >> >> ib_core ib_addr iscsi_tcp libiscsi_tcp libiscsi
>> >>> >> >> scsi_transport_iscsi
>> >>> >> >> >> bonding nfsd nfs lockd fscache auth_rpcgss nfs_acl
>> sunrpc
>> >>> >> 8021q
>> >>> >> >> garp
>> >>> >> >> >> stp
>> >>> >> >> >> joydev dm_multipath dcdbas mac_hid i7core_edac
>> edac_core
>> >>> >> >> >> acpi_power_meter lp parport usbhid hid bnx2 mpt2sas
>> >>> >> >> >> scsi_transport_sas
>> >>> >> >> >> e1000e raid_class scsi_dh_rdac usb_storage [last
>> unloaded:
>> >>> >> >> ipmi_si]
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.463058]
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.463146] Pid: 20611, comm: libvirtd Not tainted
>> >>> >> >> >> 3.2.0-26-generic
>> >>> >> >> >> #41-Ubuntu Dell Inc. PowerEdge R310/05XKKK
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.463626] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>> >>> >> >> [<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>> >>> >> >> >> gfs2_unlink+0x8a/0x220 [gfs2]
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464100] RSP: 0018:ffff88020cfe1d28 EFLAGS:
>> >>> 00010296
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464344] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX:
>> ffff88021ef58000
>> >>> >> RCX:
>> >>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d40
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464662] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI:
>> 00000000000183f3
>> >>> >> RDI:
>> >>> >> >> >> ffff88022efa2440
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464979] RBP: ffff88020cfe1e38 R08:
>> 4000000000000000
>> >>> >> R09:
>> >>> >> >> >> 0000000000000000
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.465297] R10: fdd50265775f720a R11:
>> 0000000000000003
>> >>> >> R12:
>> >>> >> >> >> ffff88021ef50000
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.465615] R13: ffff88020cfe1d80 R14:
>> ffff8802178980c0
>> >>> >> R15:
>> >>> >> >> >> ffff88022efa2000
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.466115] FS: 00007f4d2c0e7700(0000)
>> >>> >> >> GS:ffff880237200000(0000)
>> >>> >> >> >> knlGS:0000000000000000
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.466487] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0:
>> >>> >> 0000000080050033
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.466748] CR2: 0000000000000018 CR3:
>> 00000002175e4000
>> >>> >> CR4:
>> >>> >> >> >> 00000000000006f0
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.467066] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1:
>> 0000000000000000
>> >>> >> DR2:
>> >>> >> >> >> 0000000000000000
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.467384] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6:
>> 00000000ffff0ff0
>> >>> >> DR7:
>> >>> >> >> >> 0000000000000400
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.467702] Process libvirtd (pid: 20611, threadinfo
>> >>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe0000, task ffff8802241cdbc0)
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468091] Stack:
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468199] 0000000000000003 ffff88022f108048
>> >>> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d58
>> >>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d40
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468581] ffff88020cfe1d40 ffff88022f108000
>> >>> >> >> ffff88022354aa00
>> >>> >> >> >> 0000000000000001
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468963] 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> >>> >> >> ffffffffa04f7fda
>> >>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d80
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.469346] Call Trace:
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.469486] [<ffffffffa04f7fda>] ?
>> >>> gfs2_unlink+0x5a/0x220
>> >>> >> >> [gfs2]
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.469955] [<ffffffffa04f7ff4>] ?
>> >>> gfs2_unlink+0x74/0x220
>> >>> >> >> [gfs2]
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.470236] [<ffffffff8129cb2c>] ?
>> >>> >> >> >> security_inode_permission+0x1c/0x30
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.470536] [<ffffffff81184e70>]
>> >>> >> vfs_unlink.part.26+0x80/0xf0
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.470802] [<ffffffff81184f1c>]
>> vfs_unlink+0x3c/0x60
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471040] [<ffffffff8118758a>]
>> >>> do_unlinkat+0x1aa/0x1d0
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471290] [<ffffffff81177fc0>] ?
>> >>> vfs_write+0x110/0x180
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471538] [<ffffffff811782a7>] ?
>> sys_write+0x67/0x90
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471780] [<ffffffff81188106>]
>> sys_unlink+0x16/0x20
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.472019] [<ffffffff81661fc2>]
>> >>> >> >> system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.472290] Code: 00 00 49 83 c5 40 31 d2 4c 89 e9
>> be
>> >>> 01 00
>> >>> >> 00
>> >>> >> >> 00
>> >>> >> >> >> e8
>> >>> >> >> >> fc 1e ff ff 48 8b b3 28 02 00 00 4c 89 ff e8 ad 7e 00
>> 00
>> >>> 48 8d
>> >>> >> 8d
>> >>> >> >> 08
>> >>> >> >> >> ff
>> >>> >> >> >> ff ff <48> 8b 78 18 31 d2 be 01 00 00 00 48 83 e9 80 e8
>> d2
>> >>> 1e
>> >>> >> ff
>> >>> >> >> ff
>> >>> >> >> >> 48
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.473936] RIP [<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>> >>> >> gfs2_unlink+0x8a/0x220
>> >>> >> >> >> [gfs2]
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.474240] RSP <ffff88020cfe1d28>
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.474408] CR2: 0000000000000018
>> >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.474959] ---[ end trace f7df780fd45600a8 ]---
>> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> >> Bart Verwilst schreef op 20.08.2012 09:50:
>> >>> >> >> >> > Nothing out of the ordinary, should have mentioned
>> that!
>> >>> >> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >> > <snip>
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> read
>> >>> >> >> >> 20
>> >>> >> >> >> > bytes from fd 17
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> >> client
>> >>> >> >> >> > command is 7
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> About
>> >>> >> >> >> to
>> >>> >> >> >> > process command
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> memb:
>> >>> >> >> command
>> >>> >> >> >> to
>> >>> >> >> >> > process is 7
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> memb:
>> >>> >> >> >> > get_all_members: allocated new buffer (retsize=1024)
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> memb:
>> >>> >> >> >> > get_all_members: retlen = 1760
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> memb:
>> >>> >> >> command
>> >>> >> >> >> > return code is 4
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> >> > Returning command data. length = 1760
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> >> sending
>> >>> >> >> >> > reply 40000007 to fd 17
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> read
>> >>> >> >> >> 20
>> >>> >> >> >> > bytes from fd 17
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> >> client
>> >>> >> >> >> > command is 800000b7
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> About
>> >>> >> >> >> to
>> >>> >> >> >> > process command
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> memb:
>> >>> >> >> command
>> >>> >> >> >> to
>> >>> >> >> >> > process is 800000b7
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> memb:
>> >>> >> >> command
>> >>> >> >> >> > return code is 0
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> >> > Returning command data. length = 0
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> >> sending
>> >>> >> >> >> > reply c00000b7 to fd 17
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:01 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> read
>> >>> >> >> >> 20
>> >>> >> >> >> > bytes from fd 17
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:01 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> >> client
>> >>> >> >> >> > command is 7
>> >>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:01 vm02-test corosync[7394]: [CMAN ]
>> >>> daemon:
>> >>> >> >> About
>> >>> >> >> >> to
>> >>> >> >> >> > process command
>> >>> >> >> >> > </snip>
>> >>> >> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >> > Digimer schreef op 20.08.2012 00:01:
>> >>> >> >> >> >> On 08/19/2012 05:34 PM, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>> >>> >> >> >> >>> Aug 19 00:10:01 vm02-test kernel: [282120.240067]
>> >>> INFO:
>> >>> >> task
>> >>> >> >> >> >>> kworker/1:0:3117 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>> >>> >> >> >> >>> Aug 19 00:10:01 vm02-test kernel: [282120.240182]
>> >>> "echo
>> >>> 0
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >> >>> /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables
>> this
>> >>> >> >> message.
>> >>> >> >> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> >> >> Nothing around Aug 19 00:08:00 ?
>> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> >> --
>> >>> >> >> >> Linux-cluster mailing list
>> >>> >> >> >> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
>> >>> >> >> >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>>
More information about the Linux-cluster
mailing list