From: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>
To: "adp@prgmr.com" <adp@prgmr.com>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: User process NFS write hang followed by automount hang requiring reboot
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 01:09:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9033f2fd4a777a8e2bce056e15f161984ac76283.camel@hammerspace.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190530004146.GV4158@turtle.email>
On Wed, 2019-05-29 at 18:41 -0600, Alan Post wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 11:31:55AM -0600, Alan Post wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 03:46:03PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > Have you tried upgrading to 4.19.44? There is a fix that went in
> > > not
> > > too long ago that deals with a request leak that can cause stack
> > > traces
> > > like the above that wait forever.
> > >
> >
> > Following up on this. I have set aside a rack of machines and put
> > Linux 4.19.44 on them. They ran jobs overnight and will do the
> > same over the long weekend (Memorial day in the US). Given the
> > error rate (both over time and over submitted jobs) we see across
> > the cluster this well be enough time to draw a conclusion as to
> > whether 4.19.44 exhibits this hang.
> >
>
> In the six days I've run Linux 4.19.44 on a single rack, I've seen
> no occurrences of this hang. Given the incident rate for this
> issue across the cluster over the same period of time, I would have
> expected to see one on two incidents on the rack running 4.19.44.
>
> This is promising--I'm going to deploy 4.19.44 to another rack
> by the end of the day Friday May 31st and hope for more of the
> same.
>
> I wondered upthread whether the following commits were what you
> had in mind when you asked about 4.19.44:
>
> 63b0ee126f7e: NFS: Fix an I/O request leakage in
> nfs_do_recoalesce
> be74fddc976e: NFS: Fix I/O request leakages
>
> Confirming that it is these patches and no others has become
> topical for me: my upstream is now providing a 4.19.37 build,
> and I note these two patches are included since 4.19.31 and so
> are presumably in my now-available upstream 4.19.37 build.
>
> If I could trouble you to confirm whether or not this is the
> complete set of patches you had in mind for the 4.19 branch
> after 4.19.28 when you recommended I try 4.19.44 I would
> appreciate it.
>
Yes, those two patches are the ones I was specifically considering,
given the problem that you reported.
Cheers
Trond
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-30 1:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-20 22:33 User process NFS write hang followed by automount hang requiring reboot Alan Post
2019-05-21 15:46 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-05-21 19:22 ` Alan Post
2019-05-30 18:39 ` J. Bruce Fields
2019-05-31 0:22 ` Alan Post
2019-05-24 17:31 ` Alan Post
2019-05-24 19:19 ` Trond Myklebust
2019-05-30 0:41 ` Alan Post
2019-05-30 1:09 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2019-06-04 17:44 ` Alan Post
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=9033f2fd4a777a8e2bce056e15f161984ac76283.camel@hammerspace.com \
--to=trondmy@hammerspace.com \
--cc=adp@prgmr.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).