[Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 6.1: Expected tagging on April 10th

Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan atumball at redhat.com
Wed Apr 17 03:23:26 UTC 2019 

My take is, lets disable sdfs for 6.1 (we also have issues with its
performance anyways). We will fix it properly by 6.2 or 7.0. Continue with
marking sdfs-sanity.t tests as bad in that case.

-Amar

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 8:04 AM Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:33 AM Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
> pkarampu at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:27 PM Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 9:19 PM Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 7:24 PM Shyam Ranganathan <srangana at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Status: Tagging pending
>>>>>
>>>>> Waiting on patches:
>>>>> (Kotresh/Atin) - glusterd: fix loading ctime in client graph logic
>>>>>   https://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/22579
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The regression doesn't pass for the mainline patch. I believe master is
>>>> broken now. With latest master sdfs-sanity.t always fail. We either need to
>>>> fix it or mark it as bad test.
>>>>
>>>
>>> commit 3883887427a7f2dc458a9773e05f7c8ce8e62301 (HEAD)
>>> Author: Pranith Kumar K <pkarampu at redhat.com>
>>> Date:   Mon Apr 1 11:14:56 2019 +0530
>>>
>>>    features/locks: error-out {inode,entry}lk fops with all-zero lk-owner
>>>
>>>    Problem:
>>>    Sometimes we find that developers forget to assign lk-owner for an
>>>    inodelk/entrylk/lk before writing code to wind these fops. locks
>>>    xlator at the moment allows this operation. This leads to multiple
>>>    threads in the same client being able to get locks on the inode
>>>    because lk-owner is same and transport is same. So isolation
>>>    with locks can't be achieved.
>>>
>>>    Fix:
>>>    Disallow locks with lk-owner zero.
>>>
>>>    fixes bz#1624701
>>>    Change-Id: I1c816280cffd150ebb392e3dcd4d21007cdd767f
>>>    Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar K <pkarampu at redhat.com>
>>>
>>> With the above commit sdfs-sanity.t started failing. But when I looked
>>> at the last regression vote at
>>> https://build.gluster.org/job/centos7-regression/5568/consoleFull I saw
>>> it voted back positive but the bell rang when I saw the overall regression
>>> took less than 2 hours and when I opened the regression link I saw the test
>>> actually failed but still this job voted back +1 at gerrit.
>>>
>>> *Deepshika* - *This is a bad CI bug we have now and have to be
>>> addressed at earliest. Please take a look at
>>> https://build.gluster.org/job/centos7-regression/5568/consoleFull
>>> <https://build.gluster.org/job/centos7-regression/5568/consoleFull> and
>>> investigate why the regression vote wasn't negative.*
>>>
>>> Pranith - I request you to investigate on the sdfs-sanity.t failure
>>> because of this patch.
>>>
>>
>> sdfs is supposed to serialize entry fops by doing entrylk, but all the
>> locks are being done with all-zero lk-owner. In essence sdfs doesn't
>> achieve its goal of mutual exclusion when conflicting operations are
>> executed by same client because two locks on same entry with same
>> all-zero-owner will get locks. The patch which lead to sdfs-sanity.t
>> failure treats inodelk/entrylk/lk fops with all-zero lk-owner as Invalid
>> request to prevent these kinds of bugs. So it exposed the bug in sdfs. I
>> sent a fix for sdfs @ https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/22582
>>
>
> Since this patch hasn't passed the regression and now that I see
> tests/bugs/replicate/bug-1386188-sbrain-fav-child.t hanging and timing out
> in the latest nightly regression runs because of the above commit (tested
> locally and confirm) I still request that we first revert this commit, get
> master back to stable and then put back the required fixes.
>
>
>>
>>> *@Maintainers - Please open up every regression link to see the actual
>>> status of the job and don't blindly trust on the +1 vote back at gerrit
>>> till this is addressed.*
>>>
>>> As per the policy, I'm going to revert this commit, watch out for the
>>> patch. I request this to be directly pushed with out waiting for the
>>> regression vote as we had done before in such breakage. Amar/Shyam - I
>>> believe you have this permission?
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>> root at a5f81bd447c2:/home/glusterfs# prove -vf tests/basic/sdfs-sanity.t
>>>> tests/basic/sdfs-sanity.t ..
>>>> 1..7
>>>> ok 1, LINENUM:8
>>>> ok 2, LINENUM:9
>>>> ok 3, LINENUM:11
>>>> ok 4, LINENUM:12
>>>> ok 5, LINENUM:13
>>>> ok 6, LINENUM:16
>>>> mkdir: cannot create directory ‘/mnt/glusterfs/1/coverage’: Invalid
>>>> argument
>>>> stat: cannot stat '/mnt/glusterfs/1/coverage/dir': Invalid argument
>>>> tests/basic/rpc-coverage.sh: line 61: test: ==: unary operator expected
>>>> not ok 7 , LINENUM:20
>>>> FAILED COMMAND: tests/basic/rpc-coverage.sh /mnt/glusterfs/1
>>>> Failed 1/7 subtests
>>>>
>>>> Test Summary Report
>>>> -------------------
>>>> tests/basic/sdfs-sanity.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 7 Failed: 1)
>>>>   Failed test:  7
>>>> Files=1, Tests=7, 14 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr  0.00 sys +  0.58 cusr
>>>> 0.67 csys =  1.27 CPU)
>>>> Result: FAIL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Following patches will not be taken in if CentOS regression does not
>>>>> pass by tomorrow morning Eastern TZ,
>>>>> (Pranith/KingLongMee) - cluster-syncop: avoid duplicate unlock of
>>>>> inodelk/entrylk
>>>>>   https://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/22385
>>>>> (Aravinda) - geo-rep: IPv6 support
>>>>>   https://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/22488
>>>>> (Aravinda) - geo-rep: fix integer config validation
>>>>>   https://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/22489
>>>>>
>>>>> Tracker bug status:
>>>>> (Ravi) - Bug 1693155 - Excessive AFR messages from gluster showing in
>>>>> RHGSWA.
>>>>>   All patches are merged, but none of the patches adds the "Fixes"
>>>>> keyword, assume this is an oversight and that the bug is fixed in this
>>>>> release.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Atin) - Bug 1698131 - multiple glusterfsd processes being launched for
>>>>> the same brick, causing transport endpoint not connected
>>>>>   No work has occurred post logs upload to bug, restart of bircks and
>>>>> possibly glusterd is the existing workaround when the bug is hit.
>>>>> Moving
>>>>> this out of the tracker for 6.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Xavi) - Bug 1699917 - I/O error on writes to a disperse volume when
>>>>> replace-brick is executed
>>>>>   Very recent bug (15th April), does not seem to have any critical data
>>>>> corruption or service availability issues, planning on not waiting for
>>>>> the fix in 6.1
>>>>>
>>>>> - Shyam
>>>>> On 4/6/19 4:38 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>>>>> > Hi Mohit,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > https://review.gluster.org/22495 should get into 6.1 as it’s a
>>>>> > regression. Can you please attach the respective bug to the tracker
>>>>> Ravi
>>>>> > pointed out?
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 12:00, Ravishankar N <ravishankar at redhat.com
>>>>> > <mailto:ravishankar at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >     Tracker bug is
>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692394, in
>>>>> >     case anyone wants to add blocker bugs.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >     On 05/04/19 8:03 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
>>>>> >     > Hi,
>>>>> >     >
>>>>> >     > Expected tagging date for release-6.1 is on April, 10th, 2019.
>>>>> >     >
>>>>> >     > Please ensure required patches are backported and also are
>>>>> passing
>>>>> >     > regressions and are appropriately reviewed for easy merging and
>>>>> >     tagging
>>>>> >     > on the date.
>>>>> >     >
>>>>> >     > Thanks,
>>>>> >     > Shyam
>>>>> >     > _______________________________________________
>>>>> >     > Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>> >     > Gluster-devel at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>>>>> >     > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>> >     _______________________________________________
>>>>> >     Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>> >     Gluster-devel at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-devel at gluster.org>
>>>>> >     https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > - Atin (atinm)
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>> > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>>>> > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>> >
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>

-- 
Amar Tumballi (amarts)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20190417/3da9a5c5/attachment.html>

More information about the maintainers mailing list