On Tue, 3 Feb 2015 11:35:53 +0100 "Jörg Habenicht" <j.habenicht@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hello Neil,
> 
> thank you for caring.
> 
> (And sorry for the malformed structure, I have to use webmail.. )
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 09:41:02 +0000 (UTC) Jörg Habenicht <j.habenicht@gmx.de>
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I had a server crash during an array grow.
> > Commandline was "mdadm --grow /dev/md0 --raid-devices=6 --chunk=1M"
> >
> >
> >
> > Could this be caused by a software lock?
> 
> >Some sort of software problem I suspect.
> >What does
> >cat /proc/1671/stack
> >cat /proc/1672/stack
> >show?
> 
> $ cat /proc/1671/stack
> cat: /proc/1671/stack: No such file or directory

I guess you don't have that feature compiled into your kernel.

> 
> Huch?
> $ ls /proc/1671
> ls: cannot read symbolic link /proc/1671/exe: No such file or directory
> attr        comm             fdinfo     mounts      oom_score      stat
> autogroup   coredump_filter  io         mountstats  oom_score_adj  statm
> auxv        cwd              limits     net         pagemap        status
> cgroup      environ          maps       ns          personality    syscall
> clear_refs  exe              mem        numa_maps   root           task
> cmdline     fd               mountinfo  oom_adj     smaps          wchan
> $ id 
> uid=0(root) gid=0(root) groups=0(root), ...
> 
> $ cat /proc/1672/stack
> cat: /proc/1672/stack: No such file or directory
> 
> 
> >Alternatively,
> >echo w > /proc/sysrq-trigger
> >and see what appears in 'dmesg'.
> 
> No good:

Quite the reverse, this is exactly what I wanted.  It shows the stack trace
of pid 1671 and 1672..


> 
> [99166.625796] SysRq : Show Blocked State
> [99166.625829]   task                        PC stack   pid father
> [99166.625845] md0_reshape     D ffff88006cb81e08     0  1671      2 0x00000000
> [99166.625854]  ffff88006a17fb30 0000000000000046 000000000000a000 ffff88006cc9b7e0
> [99166.625861]  ffff88006a17ffd8 ffff88006cc9b7e0 ffff88006fc11830 ffff88006fc11830
> [99166.625866]  0000000000000001 ffffffff81068670 ffff88006ca56848 ffff88006fc11830
> [99166.625871] Call Trace:
> [99166.625884]  [<ffffffff81068670>] ? __dequeue_entity+0x40/0x50
> [99166.625891]  [<ffffffff8106b966>] ? pick_next_task_fair+0x56/0x1b0
> [99166.625898]  [<ffffffff813f4a50>] ? __schedule+0x2a0/0x820
> [99166.625905]  [<ffffffff8106273d>] ? ttwu_do_wakeup+0xd/0x80
> [99166.625914]  [<ffffffffa027b4c5>] ? get_active_stripe+0x185/0x5c0 [raid456]
> [99166.625922]  [<ffffffff81072110>] ? __wake_up_sync+0x10/0x10
> [99166.625929]  [<ffffffffa027e83a>] ? reshape_request+0x21a/0x860 [raid456]
> [99166.625935]  [<ffffffff81072110>] ? __wake_up_sync+0x10/0x10
> [99166.625942]  [<ffffffffa02744f6>] ? sync_request+0x236/0x380 [raid456]
> [99166.625955]  [<ffffffffa01557ad>] ? md_do_sync+0x82d/0xd00 [md_mod]
> [99166.625961]  [<ffffffff810684b4>] ? update_curr+0x64/0xe0
> [99166.625971]  [<ffffffffa0152197>] ? md_thread+0xf7/0x110 [md_mod]
> [99166.625977]  [<ffffffff81072110>] ? __wake_up_sync+0x10/0x10
> [99166.625985]  [<ffffffffa01520a0>] ? md_register_thread+0xf0/0xf0 [md_mod]
> [99166.625991]  [<ffffffff81059de8>] ? kthread+0xb8/0xd0
> [99166.625997]  [<ffffffff81059d30>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x180/0x180
> [99166.626003]  [<ffffffff813f837c>] ? ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> [99166.626008]  [<ffffffff81059d30>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x180/0x180

That's not surprise.  Whenever anything goes wrong in raid5, something gets
stuck in get_active_stripe()...


> [99166.626012] udevd           D ffff88006cb81e08     0  1672   1289 0x00000004
> [99166.626017]  ffff88006a1819e8 0000000000000086 000000000000a000 ffff88006c4967a0
> [99166.626022]  ffff88006a181fd8 ffff88006c4967a0 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> [99166.626027]  0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> [99166.626032] Call Trace:
> [99166.626039]  [<ffffffff810c24ed>] ? zone_statistics+0x9d/0xa0
> [99166.626044]  [<ffffffff810c24ed>] ? zone_statistics+0x9d/0xa0
> [99166.626050]  [<ffffffff810b13e7>] ? get_page_from_freelist+0x507/0x850
> [99166.626057]  [<ffffffffa027b4c5>] ? get_active_stripe+0x185/0x5c0 [raid456]
> [99166.626063]  [<ffffffff81072110>] ? __wake_up_sync+0x10/0x10
> [99166.626069]  [<ffffffffa027f627>] ? make_request+0x7a7/0xa00 [raid456]
> [99166.626075]  [<ffffffff81080afd>] ? ktime_get_ts+0x3d/0xd0
> [99166.626080]  [<ffffffff81072110>] ? __wake_up_sync+0x10/0x10
> [99166.626089]  [<ffffffffa014ea12>] ? md_make_request+0xd2/0x210 [md_mod]
> [99166.626096]  [<ffffffff811e649d>] ? generic_make_request_checks+0x23d/0x270
> [99166.626100]  [<ffffffff810acc68>] ? mempool_alloc+0x58/0x140
> [99166.626106]  [<ffffffff811e7238>] ? generic_make_request+0xa8/0xf0
> [99166.626111]  [<ffffffff811e72e7>] ? submit_bio+0x67/0x130
> [99166.626117]  [<ffffffff8112a638>] ? bio_alloc_bioset+0x1b8/0x2a0
> [99166.626123]  [<ffffffff81126a57>] ? _submit_bh+0x127/0x200
> [99166.626129]  [<ffffffff8112815d>] ? block_read_full_page+0x1fd/0x290
> [99166.626133]  [<ffffffff8112b680>] ? I_BDEV+0x10/0x10
> [99166.626140]  [<ffffffff810aad2b>] ? add_to_page_cache_locked+0x6b/0xc0
> [99166.626146]  [<ffffffff810b5520>] ? __do_page_cache_readahead+0x1b0/0x220
> [99166.626152]  [<ffffffff810b5812>] ? force_page_cache_readahead+0x62/0xa0
> [99166.626159]  [<ffffffff810ac936>] ? generic_file_aio_read+0x4b6/0x6c0
> [99166.626166]  [<ffffffff810f9f87>] ? do_sync_read+0x57/0x90
> [99166.626172]  [<ffffffff810fa571>] ? vfs_read+0xa1/0x180
> [99166.626178]  [<ffffffff810fb0ab>] ? SyS_read+0x4b/0xc0
> [99166.626183]  [<ffffffff813f7f72>] ? page_fault+0x22/0x30
> [99166.626190]  [<ffffffff813f8422>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

And this is stuck in the same place.... what what is consuming all the
stripes I wonder....

> 
> 
> >
> > The system got 2G RAM and 2G swap. Is this sufficient to complete?
> 
> >Memory shouldn't be a problem.
> >However it wouldn't hurt to see what value is in
> >/sys/block/md0/md/stripe_cache_size
> >and double it.
> 
> $ cat /sys/block/md0/md/stripe_cache_size
> 256


You are setting the chunk size to 1M, which is 256 4K pages.
So this stripe_cache only just has enough space to store one full stripe at
the new chunk size.  That isn't enough.

If you double it, the problem should go away.

mdadm should  do that for you .... I wonder why it didn't.


> 
> I did not change it due to the crash in md_reshape

What crash is that?  The above stack traces that you said "No good" about?
That isn't a crash.  That is the kernel showing you stack traces because you
asked for them.

 echo 1024 > /sys/block/md0/md/stripe_cache_size

should make it work.

NeilBrown


> 
> 
> >If all else fails a reboot should be safe and will probably start the reshape
> >properly. md is very careful about surviving reboots.
> 
> I already did reboot twice before I wrote to the list. Same result.
> 
> 
> >NeilBrown
> 
>  
> cu,
> Joerg 
>  
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html