On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Chris Worley<worl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Vladislav Bolkhovitin<v...@vlnb.net> wrote: >> Chris Worley, on 09/01/2009 11:24 PM wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Vladislav Bolkhovitin<v...@vlnb.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd suggest you to enable lockdep on the target. Google for more details >>>> how >>>> to do it. >>>> >>>> Also you should additional enable "mgmt_minor" SCST core trace level and >>>> only it. Don't enable "all", its output useful only in very special >>>> circumstances. >>> >>> Could you be more explicit in how to enable specific trace levels? >>> >>> For example, "all" causes the following: >>> >>> # cat /proc/scsi_tgt/vdisk/trace_level >>> out_of_mem | minor | sg | mem | buff | entryexit | pid | line | >>> function | debug | special | scsi | mgmt | mgmt_minor | mgmt_dbg | >>> order >>> # cat /proc/scsi_tgt/trace_level >>> out_of_mem | minor | sg | mem | buff | entryexit | pid | line | >>> function | debug | special | scsi | mgmt | mgmt_minor | mgmt_dbg | >>> retry | scsi_serializing | recv_bot | send_bot | recv_top | send_top >>> >>> I tried echoing just some of those flags to cut down on excess >>> verbosity, but would get errors like: >>> >>> # echo "minor | sg | mem" >/proc/scsi_tgt/vdisk/trace_level >>> bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument >>> # dmesg | tail -1l >>> [330010.019198] scst: ***ERROR***: Unknown action "minor | sg | mem" >>> >>>> Usually to investigate a problem like yours, the default >>>> flags in the debug build + "mgmt_minor" are sufficient. >>> >>> I tried "default" and didn't get any messages on the hang. >> >> See /proc/scsi_tgt/help for help about all SCST proc commands. (The latest >> commits have some cleanups in this area.) > > I found three "trace tokens" that were causing the majority of the > messages overflow: > > echo "all" >/proc/scsi_tgt/vdisk/trace_level > (echo "del scsi" ;echo "del recv_bot";echo "del send_bot") >>/proc/scsi_tgt/vdisk/trace_level > echo "all" >/proc/scsi_tgt/trace_level > (echo "del scsi" ;echo "del recv_bot";echo "del send_bot") >>/proc/scsi_tgt/trace_level > > Then, the majority of messages were the pair: > > Sep 2 17:12:22 nameme kernel: [408676.552666] [0]: scst: > __scst_init_cmd:3361:Too many pending commands (50) in session, > returning BUSY to initiator "0x0002c903000260470002c90300026047" > Sep 2 17:12:22 nameme kernel: [408676.552670] [0]: scst: > scst_set_busy:366:Sending QUEUE_FULL status to initiator > 0x0002c903000260470002c90300026047 (cmds count 79, queue_type 1, > sess->init_phase 3) > > # grep -e "returning BUSY to initiator" /var/log/messages | wc -l > 221834 > # grep -e "Sending QUEUE_FULL status to initiator" /var/log/messages | wc -l > 167948
I got rid of those two messages, along with: "Xmitting data for cmd" from scst_targ.c, and I couldn't enable the "scsi" trace token, but could re-enable the "recv_bot", and the logs were filled with: [410785.218625] [0]: scst_cmd_init_done:216:Recieving CDB: [410785.218625] (h)___0__1__2__3__4__5__6__7__8__9__A__B__C__D__E__F [410785.218628] 0: 28 00 00 b8 33 90 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 (...3........... > > Maybe the initiator has stopped due to its "busy" tracking... deciding > the target cannot continue? Note that once this occurs, I don't need to restart the target, I just need to add the target drives on the initiator again... adding more entries to /proc/partitions... I can't use the partitions that are hung on the initiator, but I can use the newly added partitions. This makes me think this is an initiator issue. Is there any debugging to enable for ib_srp? But the contradictory results show the problem seems to follow the target used, and should therefor be a target issue (i.e. the 8KB problem w/ the Ubuntu target happens w/ Ubuntu or WinOF initiator, and the <2KB problem w/ the OFED/RHEL stack works fine w/ an RHEL initiator, but not WinOF). Thanks, Chris > > Is the queue settable to larger than 50 outstanding commands? > > Thanks, > > Chris >> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Chris >>>> >>>> Vlad >>>> >>>> Chris Worley, on 09/01/2009 03:04 AM wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Bart Van >>>>> Assche<bart.vanass...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Chris Worley<worl...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I setup my target exactly as you prescribe... but my initiator is >>>>>>> still Windows (version of WInOF at top): performance as relayed by >>>>>>> IOMeter starts high and the average slowly decreases. Watching the >>>>>>> instantaneous throughput, there seem to be longer and longer lags of >>>>>>> poor performance. between moments of good performance. I need to run >>>>>>> this against a Linux initiator to see if the problems are w/ WinOF. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Using OFED 1.4.1 (w/ the stock RHEL kernel) on the target, the >>>>>>> performance was steady and getting close to acceptable. In a 15 hour >>>>>>> test that cycles through sequential and random LBA's and R/W mixes >>>>>>> from block sizes from 1MB to 512B, it worked well and got decent >>>>>>> performance until it hit 1KB sequential reads which hung IOMeter; no >>>>>>> messages on the Linux side (all looked okay). IBSRP on the Windows >>>>>>> side just said "a reset to device was issued" every 15 to 30 seconds >>>>>>> after the problem started. I reloaded the IB stack on the Linux side, >>>>>>> and was able to get it restarted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Still a lot of combinations to test. >>>>>> >>>>>> Which trace settings are you using on the target ? Enabling the proper >>>>>> trace settings via /proc/scsi_tgt/trace_level might reveal whether you >>>>>> are e.g. hitting the QUEUE_FULL condition. See also scst/README. >>>>> >>>>> I've found a good kernel/scst mix to easily repeat this; I can get it >>>>> to repeatedly hang w/ 8K block transfers running Ubuntu 9.04 w/ the >>>>> 2.6.27-14-server kernel on _both_ target and initiator (i.e. no WinOF >>>>> or OFED at all) and SCST rev 1062 on the target using one drive >>>>> (performance is >600MB/s, >80K IOPS, on the 8KB block sizes being >>>>> used). >>>>> >>>>> Although the problem doesn't occur in Windows until blocks are <2KB >>>>> and the RHEL5.2/OFED configuration does not repeat the issue using a >>>>> Linux initiator, it seems like a very similar hang, so I'm hoping it's >>>>> the same issue. >>>>> >>>>> To repeat the issue, I run 8KB block random reads w/ 64 threads, >>>>> running AIO calls w/ a depth of 64 (using "fio" on the initiator): >>>>> >>>>> # fio --rw=randrw --bs=8k --rwmixread=100 --numjobs=64 --iodepth=64 >>>>> --sync=0 --direct=1 --randrepeat=0 --ioengine=libaio >>>>> --filename=/dev/sdn --name=test --loops=10000 --size=16091503001 >>>>> >>>>> The "size" represents 10% of the drive. It doesn't seem to ever >>>>> happen on writes, but I've seen it happen on mixed reads/writes. >>>>> >>>>> With tracing set to "default", there was still nothing in the target >>>>> logs at the time of the hang. >>>>> >>>>> With tracing set thusly on the target: >>>>> >>>>> echo "all" >/proc/scsi_tgt/trace_level >>>>> echo "all" >/proc/scsi_tgt/vdisk/trace_level >>>>> >>>>> The last few lines of dmesg look like: >>>>> >>>>> [255354.313411] 0: 28 00 01 84 54 90 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 >>>>> (...T........... >>>>> [255354.313420] [0]: scst: scst_cmd_init_done:214:tag=62, lun=0, CDB >>>>> len=16, queue_type=1 (cmd ffff880102b4a568) >>>>> [255354.313443] [26358]: scst: scst_pre_parse:417:op_name <READ(10)> >>>>> (cmd ffff880102b4a3a0), direction=2 (expected 2, set yes), >>>>> transfer_len=16 (expected len 8192), flags=1 >>>>> [255354.313420] [0]: scst_cmd_init_done:216:Recieving CDB: >>>>> [255354.313452] [8602]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880102b49e48 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff880132579f60, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe200042b7180) >>>>> [255354.313457] [8604]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880102b4a010 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff8802e9806f60, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe2000bc129c0) >>>>> [255354.313426] (h)___0__1__2__3__4__5__6__7__8__9__A__B__C__D__E__F >>>>> [255354.313426] 0: 28 00 01 bc 5d 10 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 >>>>> (...]........... >>>>> [255354.313468] [26358]: scst: scst_pre_parse:417:op_name <READ(10)> >>>>> (cmd ffff880102b4a568), direction=2 (expected 2, set yes), >>>>> transfer_len=16 (expected len 8192), flags=1 >>>>> [255354.313484] [8602]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880102b4a1d8 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff8802e98064c0, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe2000bc633c0) >>>>> [255354.313551] [8604]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880102b4a3a0 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff88018a877060, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe20004300200) >>>>> [255354.313556] [8602]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880102b4a568 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff880142581100, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe20004066d40) >>>>> >>>>> ... and there's a section like: >>>>> >>>>> [255354.310177] 0: 28 00 01 25 df 50 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 >>>>> (..%.P.......... >>>>> [255354.310177] [0]: scst: scst_cmd_init_done:214:tag=57, lun=0, CDB >>>>> len=16, queue_type=1 (cmd ffff8801642e2730) >>>>> [255354.310177] [0]: scst_cmd_init_done:216:Recieving CDB: >>>>> [255354.310177] (h)___0__1__2__3__4__5__6__7__8__9__A__B__C__D__E__F >>>>> [255354.310177] 0: 28 00 01 5e 22 c0 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 >>>>> (..^"........... >>>>> [255354.310966] [26369]: scst: scst_pre_parse:417:op_name <READ(10)> >>>>> (cmd ffff880168a9e3a0), direction=2 (expected 2, set yes), >>>>> transfer_len=16 (expected len 8192), flags=1 >>>>> [255354.310973] [26361]: scst: scst_pre_parse:417:op_name <READ(10)> >>>>> (cmd ffff880168a9e010), direction=2 (expected 2, set yes), >>>>> transfer_len=16 (expected len 8192), flags=1 >>>>> [255354.310980] [26365]: scst: scst_pre_parse:417:op_name <READ(10)> >>>>> (cmd ffff880168a9e1d8), direction=2 (expected 2, set yes), >>>>> transfer_len=16 (expected len 8192), flags=1 >>>>> [255354.310986] [26359]: scst: scst_pre_parse:417:op_name <READ(10)> >>>>> (cmd ffff880168a9de48), direction=2 (expected 2, set yes), >>>>> transfer_len=16 (expected len 8192), flags=1 >>>>> ... >>>>> [255354.311221] [8604]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880168a9e1d8 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff880173ca8060, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe20004325d00) >>>>> [255354.311226] [8602]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880168a9ee50 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff880173ca8c40, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe20005847ec0) >>>>> [255354.311233] [8604]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880168a9dc80 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff8802f0143c40, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe2000bc04880) >>>>> [255354.311238] [8602]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880168a9e568 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff8802f08361a0, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe2000bbf2400) >>>>> [255354.311242] [8604]: scst: scst_xmit_response:3004:Xmitting data >>>>> for cmd ffff880168a9d560 (sg_cnt 0, sg ffff88010acd74c0, sg[0].page >>>>> ffffe200047e7280) >>>>> >>>>> ... but, prior to that, messages are unreadably garbled, as in: >>>>> >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: t]9l ft48 r(09 ,83_5p s20 sg:303 >>>>> _00s3]c_=cs _00ad0000e_003a6_0031_4(ea5 9arg )_2As_05s_8[7:c8[f3 _178 >>>>> 087gff0 .R nt]9i0tmpd1:ft st06s68 5i9[301602_106)o6 _001e4 0<s0 3>)0 >>>>> .3E3_28a9102 pft0>e_o[.eo[<_2n05 98_0f8_i xpe1f0 D<98s np8one:21_0 >>>>> 30f3006=e_ ax R8gs=h62]= 2.pd_ pad555mlf >>>>> 1_]f8=.05lf i7gxs_ac3 m_0c0:]5i3087[_ 5e sg,00[dc3e,_ 0[ ( 1<[t]F] >>>>> ..eb 4t_ ah1,_1_]10.h45_]2,5__12C5o 37 d_.)b_g4f850s, t1e c80.ite.8pE >>>>> ue2.4f[.ft0 5c5_1effft 5530 f len=16, 5v03,em_cs4e 05fc78.5r5. n >>>>> ,45ft45ff<if_:4fnd5c<ts54c078f9]_0c0a0efee04f[,1n 0 __5deff588=f82 >>>>> .t)m9.8)9.8077=s _C 3 i8 .tlsf5_[0s0 (2u fu 4 >>>>> 5fco5fnr.n0a05_34f__4fd_4n Bs60fn4pB.tor7=s >>>>> _i8s7=0_.tl:c>l3e0.51_654.30350en.m C30 C3 e f.dtm0=2_1e0n]6qe d.>_ >>>>> 76 d=f _esr_tp 9_50.tnf50[cs., >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: e .0 5 B , 45 0<s382 3_ >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: c2< s0< cm38cf58.[f10 002< c3De >>>>> _)088m8 9c5299pected__F >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: tran50 pt48)=8]=s59etl5pe4e6d)0c6 >>>>> ei_2(e_<3cc_ ea51es_0_sras A >cmdtesafe4 3[m 3.rer7:[ 1b00s5 >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: ] 2a015ffs.35fff B__ a >>>>> 6cmd9spre3se9_2e3806(3_csA_ 1 ns38ge0sre0 >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: <g data sf9_ _ 6d 0se5245f_26._2 >>>>> .,76.9<g fe t_]t6:(E...:s5D.s0_<Rte46>0330B005]08s3 __ r40r._5x,<Re08 >>>>> :2ec_ :06cs1_0ti1d l:253064enfe7]0 abd5 0f>196.t b 7.(008ni] >>>>> 0s09.r650t, <24]__ s1=in03 s0p c2>>[4ein.1:ooD..ps210a>[25534_r6,:t >>>>> n4.]4(8 e2 .r c 2n1g9360]10>( 00 00 00 00[fd[2 >>>>> [2g_re53 le_6c_md8t_ftc883tf03c m_0 :8r8fmd63m3:0] 25 >>>>> c6>[2n_e:fa2e84_0 >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: c, >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: .=0>5f=1s5=1d6_(de:d >>>>> 2l_25:0edg25fm>ff40 l440 e,AFg l)AF0 0o[1088. 1aggB >>>>> 0n=d9(16a.5oeX6csf00s0: ._, (=10es_(1 7 5c___oR5st_42p3d 7 >>>>> C9d=5_:(3__7mD4_ 0m4_ed >>>>> 04,5.,[s55.d4c,,25=,c8__q,[(meet9303_mr0ue9m0u_032__fy2se >>>>> Aug 31 22:37:00 nameme kernel: > y>i >>>>> >>>>> ... so other suggestions on trace settings would be appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Chris >>>>>> >>>>>> Bart. >> >> > _______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
