Re: Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:00 PM, ronny.hegew...@online.de > wrote: >>> Could you share the entire log snippet for those 10 minutes? >> >> Thats all in the logs. But if more information would be

Aw: Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

> Could you share the entire log snippet for those 10 minutes?   Thats all in the logs.  But if more information would be useful tell me which logs to activate and i will give it another run. At least this part is easy to reproduce. > Which kernel was this on? The latest kernel i used which

Re: Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:00 PM, ronny.hegew...@online.de wrote: >> Could you share the entire log snippet for those 10 minutes? > > Thats all in the logs. But if more information would be useful tell me which > logs > to activate and i will give it another run. At

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Ronny Hegewald wrote: > On Thursday 22 October 2015, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> Well, checksum mismatches are to be expected given what we are doing >> now, but I wouldn't expect any data corruptions. Ronny writes that he >> saw frequent

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On 10/22/15, 11:52 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Mike Christie wrote: On 10/22/2015 06:20 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: If we are just talking about if stable pages are not used, and someone is re-writing data to a page after the page has already

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Mike Christie wrote: > On 10/22/15, 11:52 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Mike Christie >> wrote: >>> >>> On 10/22/2015 06:20 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> >> If we are just

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Mike Christie wrote: > On 10/21/2015 03:57 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: Hmm... On the

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Thursday 22 October 2015, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > Well, checksum mismatches are to be expected given what we are doing > now, but I wouldn't expect any data corruptions. Ronny writes that he > saw frequent ext4 corruptions on krbd devices before he enabled stable > pages, which leads me to

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Thursday 22 October 2015, you wrote: > It could be due to a recent change. Ronny, tell us about the workload > and I will check iscsi. I guess the best testcase is a kernel compilation in a make clean; make -j (> 1); loop. The data-corruptions usually happen in the generated .cmd files,

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On 10/22/2015 06:20 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > >> > >> > If we are just talking about if stable pages are not used, and someone >> > is re-writing data to a page after the page has already been submitted >> > to the block layer (I mean the page is on some bio which is on a request >> > which is on

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Mike Christie wrote: > On 10/22/2015 06:20 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> >>> > >>> > If we are just talking about if stable pages are not used, and someone >>> > is re-writing data to a page after the page has already been submitted >>> > to the

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On 10/21/2015 03:57 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >>> Hmm... On the one hand, yes, we do compute CRCs, but that's optional, >>> so enabling this

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> Hmm... On the one hand, yes, we do compute CRCs, but that's optional, >> so enabling this unconditionally is probably too harsh. OTOH we are

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > Hmm... On the one hand, yes, we do compute CRCs, but that's optional, > so enabling this unconditionally is probably too harsh. OTOH we are > talking to the network, which means all sorts of delays, retransmission >

Re: [PATCH] mark rbd requiring stable pages

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Ronny Hegewald wrote: > rbd requires stable pages, as it performs a crc of the page data before they > are send to the OSDs. > > But since kernel 3.9 (patch 1d1d1a767206fbe5d4c69493b7e6d2a8d08cc0a0 "mm: only > enforce stable page writes