[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] gfs2 blocking tasks



Hi Steven,

I have just tested this kernel:

http://people.canonical.com/~apw/lp1020207-precise/

Which contains 2 patches, 0001-GFS2-More-automated-code-analysis-fixes.patch and 0002-GFS2-Read-in-rindex-if-necessary-during-unlink.patch. This will probably be included into the latest stable kernel of Ubuntu 12.04.

Works perfectly now, can't reproduce this bug anymore.

What's next to push this to -stable?

Bart

Steven Whitehouse schreef op 22.08.2012 10:44:
Hi,

On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 09:35 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
Hi Steven,

I'm not sure if this is enough to fix it in 3.2:

--- inode.c.orig	2012-08-22 07:28:15.675859475 +0000
+++ inode.c	2012-08-22 07:33:05.895865014 +0000
@@ -1039,6 +1039,10 @@
  	struct gfs2_rgrpd *rgd;
  	int error;

+	error = gfs2_rindex_update(sdp);
+	if (error)
+		return error;
+
  	gfs2_holder_init(dip->i_gl, LM_ST_EXCLUSIVE, 0, ghs);
  	gfs2_holder_init(ip->i_gl,  LM_ST_EXCLUSIVE, 0, ghs + 1);

I've left off the "if (!rgd) { ... }" part since out_inodes doesn't
exist yet there, so it seemed unneeded. I'm far from a kernel developer though, so please give your OK for this, so i can try to push it into
Ubuntu and/or upstream.

Bart

It may well be enough. If we can verify that, then I'm happy to ACK this
for -stable,

Steve.

Bart Verwilst schreef op 21.08.2012 22:35:
> Hi Steven,
>
> I've tested with kernel 3.3 (
> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v3.3-precise/ ), bug
> isnt present there. Tried with 3.2.28 ( also from the kernel-ppa ), > and bug happens there. In the end i was idd able to trace it back to
> 3.3-rc6, where you pushed a couple of GFS2 patches upstream.
>
> inode.c for example is quite different between 3.2.28 and 3.3-rc1,
> and i do not dare to hack myself a diff file that incorporates your > change, fearing it will probably be less stable than it is already.
> :)
>
> Would it be too much to ask to backport your change to 3.2.x? I will > then test this, and try to push it upstream to -stable and/or ubuntu
> LTS..
>
> Thanks a lot in advance!
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Bart
>
> Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 14:37:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 14:23 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>>> Hi Steven,
>>>
>>> The kernel of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS is based on 3.2.0, while the patch
>>> you
>>> mentioned seems to be for a newer(?) version.
>>> What should I do, offer an altered version of this patch for
>>> inclusion
>>> into Ubuntu's 3.2.0 kernel, or is it a little less straightforward
>>> than
>>> this? :)
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Bart
>>>
>> Well, since you've not got that patch in your existing kernel, then
>> there are really two issues here. Firstly to try and verify that
>> this
>> patch really is a fix for the problem, and then to figure out what
>> needs
>> to be done wrt Ubuntu distro kernels. One solution may be to post it
>> for
>> the upstream -stable kernel as I think most distros will then pick
>> this
>> up.
>>
>> Are you able to build a new Ubuntu kernel with that patch in it?
>> That
>> would be one way to test it. Another way which doesn't require
>> building
>> kernels is this:
>>
>> The problem occurs when the resource groups are not uptodate, and
>> various actions taken on the filesystem will ensure that they are
>> uptodate. Mounting a filesystem and immediately running an unlink of
>> a
>> file which is known to exist on the filesystem (before performing
>> any
>> other action) should trigger that bug if it is present.
>>
>> It may not be that particular bug, but that looks the most likely of
>> any
>> recent patch to that bit of code. Are you able to try a more recent >> Ubuntu kernel? If you could try one based on a more recent upstream
>> which has that patch in it, then that might also help narrow down
>> the
>> problem,
>>
>> Steve.
>>
>>> Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 13:27:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 13:03 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>>> >> Hi Steven,
>>> >>
>>> >> There is no drbd in the mix ( which is why i changed the title
>>> of
>>> >> the
>>> >> bugreport now ). I'm only using plain iSCSI. The original posted
>>> had
>>> >> it
>>> >> with drbd :)
>>> >>
>>> >> Kind regards,
>>> >>
>>> >> Bart
>>> >>
>>> > Ah, I see sorry.. I misunderstood the report. I wonder whether
>>> your
>>> > distro kernel has this patch:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=718b97bd6b03445be53098e3c8f896aeebc304aa
>>> >
>>> > Thats the most likely thing that I can see that has been fixed
>>> > recently,
>>> >
>>> > Steve.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 12:59:
>>> >> > Hi,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:39 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>>> >> >> Hi Steven
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Shared storage is iSCSI,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> <totem rrp_mode="none" secauth="off" token="20000"/>
>>> >> >> <quorumd tko="4" interval="2"
>>> >> >> device="/dev/mapper/iscsi_cluster_quorum"></quorumd>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Actually i know why this is happening now, and can reproduce
>>> 100%
>>> >> of
>>> >> >> the time, i've added my findings as a comment to this bug
>>> from
>>> >> >> somebody
>>> >> >> having the same problem:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gfs2-utils/+bug/1020207
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Create file on one node's gfs2 mount, rm on the other ->
>>> hanging
>>> >> >> mountpoint + kernel OOPS.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Happy that i'm finally getting somewhere with this :P
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Anything i can do to help Steven?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Kind regards,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Bart Verwilst
>>> >> >>
>>> >> > Can you reproduce this without drbd in the mix? That should
>>> remove
>>> >> > one
>>> >> > complication and make this easier to track down.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I'll take a look at see what that dereference is likely to be
>>> in
>>> >> the
>>> >> > mean time,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Steve.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> Steven Whitehouse schreef op 21.08.2012 12:17:
>>> >> >> > Hi,
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:08 +0200, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>>> >> >> >> As yet another reply to my own post, i found this on the
>>> node
>>> >> >> where
>>> >> >> >> it
>>> >> >> >> hangs ( this time it's vm01, and /var/lib/libvirt/sanlock
>>> >> that's
>>> >> >> >> hanging
>>> >> >> >> ):
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.640653] GFS2: fsid=: Trying to join cluster
>>> "lock_dlm",
>>> >> >> >> "kvm:sanlock"
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.660035] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: Joined cluster.
>>> Now
>>> >> >> >> mounting
>>> >> >> >> FS...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.720108] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0, already
>>> locked
>>> >> >> for
>>> >> >> >> use
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.720113] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Looking at
>>> >> >> >> journal...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772606] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Acquiring
>>> the
>>> >> >> >> transaction lock...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772659] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Replaying
>>> >> >> journal...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772675] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Replayed 0
>>> of
>>> >> 0
>>> >> >> >> blocks
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.772679] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Found 1
>>> revoke
>>> >> >> tags
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.782611] init: libvirt-bin main process ended,
>>> >> respawning
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.784161] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Journal
>>> >> replayed
>>> >> >> in
>>> >> >> >> 1s
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.784268] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=0: Done
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.784329] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=1: Trying to
>>> >> acquire
>>> >> >> >> journal lock...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.788349] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=1: Looking at
>>> >> >> >> journal...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.886047] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=1: Done
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.886110] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Trying to
>>> >> acquire
>>> >> >> >> journal lock...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.891121] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Looking at
>>> >> >> >> journal...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.943994] init: ttyS1 main process (20318) terminated
>>> >> with
>>> >> >> >> status
>>> >> >> >> 1
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.944037] init: ttyS1 main process ended, respawning >>> >> >> >> [ 1219.967054] init: ttyS0 main process (20320) terminated
>>> >> with
>>> >> >> >> status
>>> >> >> >> 1
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.967100] init: ttyS0 main process ended, respawning
>>> >> >> >> [ 1219.972037] ttyS0: LSR safety check engaged!
>>> >> >> >> [ 1220.226027] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Acquiring
>>> the
>>> >> >> >> transaction lock...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1220.226160] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Replaying
>>> >> >> journal...
>>> >> >> >> [ 1220.311801] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Replayed 3
>>> of
>>> >> 106
>>> >> >> >> blocks
>>> >> >> >> [ 1220.311805] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Found 4487
>>> >> revoke
>>> >> >> >> tags
>>> >> >> >> [ 1220.322148] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Journal
>>> >> replayed
>>> >> >> in
>>> >> >> >> 1s
>>> >> >> >> [ 1220.322253] GFS2: fsid=kvm:sanlock.0: jid=2: Done
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > So that looks like it successfully recovered the journals
>>> for
>>> >> >> nodes
>>> >> >> > one
>>> >> >> > and two. How many nodes are in the cluster? What is the
>>> fencing
>>> >> >> > quorum
>>> >> >> > set up being used?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.457120] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer
>>> >> >> dereference
>>> >> >> >> at
>>> >> >> >> 0000000000000018
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > So this is a dereference of something which is 24 bytes
>>> into
>>> >> some
>>> >> >> > structure or other. Certainly something which should not
>>> happen
>>> >> so
>>> >> >> we
>>> >> >> > need to take a look at that.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Was this a one off, or something that you can reproduce?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Steve.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.457508] IP: [<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>>> gfs2_unlink+0x8a/0x220
>>> >> >> >> [gfs2]
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.457958] PGD 2170f2067 PUD 20c0ff067 PMD 0
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.458197] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.458374] CPU 0
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.458460] Modules linked in: gfs2 dlm ipmi_si mptctl
>>> >> mptbase
>>> >> >> >> ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler dell_rbu ip6table_filter
>>> >> ip6_tables
>>> >> >> >> iptable_filter ip_tables ebtable_nat ebtables x_tables
>>> >> kvm_intel
>>> >> >> kvm
>>> >> >> >> ocfs2_dlmfs ocfs2_stack_o2cb ocfs2_dlm ocfs2_nodemanager
>>> >> >> >> ocfs2_stackglue
>>> >> >> >> configfs dm_round_robin ib_iser bridge rdma_cm ib_cm iw_cm
>>> >> ib_sa
>>> >> >> >> ib_mad
>>> >> >> >> ib_core ib_addr iscsi_tcp libiscsi_tcp libiscsi
>>> >> >> scsi_transport_iscsi
>>> >> >> >> bonding nfsd nfs lockd fscache auth_rpcgss nfs_acl sunrpc
>>> >> 8021q
>>> >> >> garp
>>> >> >> >> stp
>>> >> >> >> joydev dm_multipath dcdbas mac_hid i7core_edac edac_core
>>> >> >> >> acpi_power_meter lp parport usbhid hid bnx2 mpt2sas
>>> >> >> >> scsi_transport_sas
>>> >> >> >> e1000e raid_class scsi_dh_rdac usb_storage [last unloaded:
>>> >> >> ipmi_si]
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.463058]
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.463146] Pid: 20611, comm: libvirtd Not tainted
>>> >> >> >> 3.2.0-26-generic
>>> >> >> >> #41-Ubuntu Dell Inc. PowerEdge R310/05XKKK
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.463626] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>>> >> >> [<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>>> >> >> >> gfs2_unlink+0x8a/0x220 [gfs2]
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464100] RSP: 0018:ffff88020cfe1d28  EFLAGS:
>>> 00010296
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464344] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff88021ef58000
>>> >> RCX:
>>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d40
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464662] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00000000000183f3
>>> >> RDI:
>>> >> >> >> ffff88022efa2440
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.464979] RBP: ffff88020cfe1e38 R08: 4000000000000000
>>> >> R09:
>>> >> >> >> 0000000000000000
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.465297] R10: fdd50265775f720a R11: 0000000000000003
>>> >> R12:
>>> >> >> >> ffff88021ef50000
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.465615] R13: ffff88020cfe1d80 R14: ffff8802178980c0
>>> >> R15:
>>> >> >> >> ffff88022efa2000
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.466115] FS:  00007f4d2c0e7700(0000)
>>> >> >> GS:ffff880237200000(0000)
>>> >> >> >> knlGS:0000000000000000
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.466487] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0:
>>> >> 0000000080050033
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.466748] CR2: 0000000000000018 CR3: 00000002175e4000
>>> >> CR4:
>>> >> >> >> 00000000000006f0
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.467066] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000
>>> >> DR2:
>>> >> >> >> 0000000000000000
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.467384] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0
>>> >> DR7:
>>> >> >> >> 0000000000000400
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.467702] Process libvirtd (pid: 20611, threadinfo
>>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe0000, task ffff8802241cdbc0)
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468091] Stack:
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468199]  0000000000000003 ffff88022f108048
>>> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d58
>>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d40
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468581]  ffff88020cfe1d40 ffff88022f108000
>>> >> >> ffff88022354aa00
>>> >> >> >> 0000000000000001
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.468963]  0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>>> >> >> ffffffffa04f7fda
>>> >> >> >> ffff88020cfe1d80
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.469346] Call Trace:
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.469486]  [<ffffffffa04f7fda>] ?
>>> gfs2_unlink+0x5a/0x220
>>> >> >> [gfs2]
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.469955]  [<ffffffffa04f7ff4>] ?
>>> gfs2_unlink+0x74/0x220
>>> >> >> [gfs2]
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.470236]  [<ffffffff8129cb2c>] ?
>>> >> >> >> security_inode_permission+0x1c/0x30
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.470536]  [<ffffffff81184e70>]
>>> >> vfs_unlink.part.26+0x80/0xf0
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.470802] [<ffffffff81184f1c>] vfs_unlink+0x3c/0x60
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471040]  [<ffffffff8118758a>]
>>> do_unlinkat+0x1aa/0x1d0
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471290]  [<ffffffff81177fc0>] ?
>>> vfs_write+0x110/0x180
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471538] [<ffffffff811782a7>] ? sys_write+0x67/0x90 >>> >> >> >> [ 1221.471780] [<ffffffff81188106>] sys_unlink+0x16/0x20
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.472019]  [<ffffffff81661fc2>]
>>> >> >> system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.472290] Code: 00 00 49 83 c5 40 31 d2 4c 89 e9 be
>>> 01 00
>>> >> 00
>>> >> >> 00
>>> >> >> >> e8
>>> >> >> >> fc 1e ff ff 48 8b b3 28 02 00 00 4c 89 ff e8 ad 7e 00 00
>>> 48 8d
>>> >> 8d
>>> >> >> 08
>>> >> >> >> ff
>>> >> >> >> ff ff <48> 8b 78 18 31 d2 be 01 00 00 00 48 83 e9 80 e8 d2
>>> 1e
>>> >> ff
>>> >> >> ff
>>> >> >> >> 48
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.473936] RIP  [<ffffffffa04f800a>]
>>> >> gfs2_unlink+0x8a/0x220
>>> >> >> >> [gfs2]
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.474240]  RSP <ffff88020cfe1d28>
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.474408] CR2: 0000000000000018
>>> >> >> >> [ 1221.474959] ---[ end trace f7df780fd45600a8 ]---
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Bart Verwilst schreef op 20.08.2012 09:50:
>>> >> >> >> > Nothing out of the ordinary, should have mentioned that!
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> > <snip>
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> read
>>> >> >> >> 20
>>> >> >> >> > bytes from fd 17
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> >> client
>>> >> >> >> > command is 7
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> About
>>> >> >> >> to
>>> >> >> >> > process command
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> memb:
>>> >> >> command
>>> >> >> >> to
>>> >> >> >> > process is 7
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> memb:
>>> >> >> >> > get_all_members: allocated new buffer (retsize=1024)
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> memb:
>>> >> >> >> > get_all_members: retlen = 1760
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> memb:
>>> >> >> command
>>> >> >> >> > return code is 4
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> >> > Returning command data. length = 1760
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> >> sending
>>> >> >> >> > reply 40000007 to fd 17
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> read
>>> >> >> >> 20
>>> >> >> >> > bytes from fd 17
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> >> client
>>> >> >> >> > command is 800000b7
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> About
>>> >> >> >> to
>>> >> >> >> > process command
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> memb:
>>> >> >> command
>>> >> >> >> to
>>> >> >> >> > process is 800000b7
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> memb:
>>> >> >> command
>>> >> >> >> > return code is 0
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> >> > Returning command data. length = 0
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:00 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> >> sending
>>> >> >> >> > reply c00000b7 to fd 17
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:01 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> read
>>> >> >> >> 20
>>> >> >> >> > bytes from fd 17
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:01 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> >> client
>>> >> >> >> > command is 7
>>> >> >> >> > Aug 19 00:08:01 vm02-test corosync[7394]:   [CMAN  ]
>>> daemon:
>>> >> >> About
>>> >> >> >> to
>>> >> >> >> > process command
>>> >> >> >> > </snip>
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> > Digimer schreef op 20.08.2012 00:01:
>>> >> >> >> >> On 08/19/2012 05:34 PM, Bart Verwilst wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >>> Aug 19 00:10:01 vm02-test kernel: [282120.240067]
>>> INFO:
>>> >> task
>>> >> >> >> >>> kworker/1:0:3117 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>>> >> >> >> >>> Aug 19 00:10:01 vm02-test kernel: [282120.240182]
>>> "echo
>>> 0
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >>> /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this
>>> >> >> message.
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> Nothing around Aug 19 00:08:00 ?
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> --
>>> >> >> >> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>> >> >> >> Linux-cluster redhat com
>>> >> >> >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>> >> >>
>>> >>
>>>



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]