[ovirt-devel] Re: OST fails, nothing provides nmstate

On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 1:27 PM Marcin Sobczyk <msobczyk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi, > > I ran OST on my physical server. > I'm experiencing probably the same issues as described in the thread > below. > > On one of the hosts: > > [root@lago-basic-suite-master-host-0 tmp]# ls -l /rhev/data-center/mnt/ > ls: cannot access '/rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share1': > Operation not permitted > ls: cannot access '/rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share2': > Operation not permitted > ls: cannot access '/rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_exported': > Operation not permitted > total 0 > d?????????? ? ? ? ? ? 192.168.200.4: > _exports_nfs_exported > d?????????? ? ? ? ? ? 192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share1 > d?????????? ? ? ? ? ? 192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share2 > drwxr-xr-x. 3 vdsm kvm 50 Nov 27 04:22 blockSD > > I think there's some problem with the nfs shares on engine. > We saw it recently with the move to RHEL8, Nir isn't that the same issue with the NFS squashing?

> > ➜ /tmp mkdir -p /tmp/aaa && mount "192.168.200.4:/exports/nfs/share1" > /tmp/aaa > ➜ /tmp ls -l /tmp/aaa > total 4 > drwxr-xr-x. 5 36 kvm 4096 Nov 27 10:18 > 3332759c-a943-4fbd-80aa-a5f72cd87c7c > ➜ /tmp > > But trying to do that from one of the hosts fails: > > [root@lago-basic-suite-master-host-0 tmp]# mkdir -p /tmp/aaa && mount -v > "192.168.200.4:/exports/nfs/share1" /tmp/aaa > mount.nfs: timeout set for Wed Nov 27 06:26:19 2019 > mount.nfs: trying text-based options > 'vers=4.2,addr=192.168.200.4,clientaddr=192.168.201.2' > mount.nfs: mount(2): Operation not permitted > mount.nfs: trying text-based options 'addr=192.168.200.4' > mount.nfs: prog 100003, trying vers=3, prot=6 > mount.nfs: portmap query failed: RPC: Remote system error - No route to > host >

On the engine side, '/var/log/messages' seems to be flooded with nfs > issues, example failures: > > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: > __find_in_sessionid_hashtbl: 1574853151:3430996717:11:0 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsd4_sequence: > slotid 0 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: check_slot_seqid > enter. seqid 405 slot_seqid 404 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound op > ffff9042fc202080 opcnt 3 #1: 53: status 0 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound op > #2/3: 22 (OP_PUTFH) > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsd: > fh_verify(28: 00070001 00340001 00000000 e50ae88b 5c44c45a 2b7c3991) > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsd: request from > insecure port 192.168.200.1, port=51529! > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound op > ffff9042fc202080 opcnt 3 #2: 22: status 1 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound > returned 1 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: --> > nfsd4_store_cache_entry slot ffff9042c4d97000 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: renewing client > (clientid 5dde5a1f/cc80daed) > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsd_dispatch: > vers 4 proc 1 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound op > #1/3: 53 (OP_SEQUENCE) > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: > __find_in_sessionid_hashtbl: 1574853151:3430996717:11:0 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsd4_sequence: > slotid 0 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: check_slot_seqid > enter. seqid 406 slot_seqid 405 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound op > ffff9042fc202080 opcnt 3 #1: 53: status 0 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound op > #2/3: 22 (OP_PUTFH) > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsd: > fh_verify(28: 00070001 00340001 00000000 e50ae88b 5c44c45a 2b7c3991) > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsd: request from > insecure port 192.168.200.1, port=51529! > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound op > ffff9042fc202080 opcnt 3 #2: 22: status 1 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: nfsv4 compound > returned 1 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: --> > nfsd4_store_cache_entry slot ffff9042c4d97000 > Nov 27 06:25:25 lago-basic-suite-master-engine kernel: renewing client > (clientid 5dde5a1f/cc80daed) > > Regards, Marcin > > On 11/26/19 8:40 PM, Martin Perina wrote: > > I've just merged https://gerrit.ovirt.org/105111 which only silence the > issue, but we really need to unblock OST, as it's suffering from this for > more than 2 weeks now. > > Tal/Nir, could someone really investigate why the storage become > unavailable after some time? It may be caused by recent switch of hosts to > CentOS 8, but may be not related > > Thanks, > Martin > > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 9:17 AM Dominik Holler <dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 7:12 PM Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 7:15 PM Dominik Holler <dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 6:03 PM Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 6:48 PM Dominik Holler <dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 5:16 PM Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 6:05 PM Dominik Holler < >>> dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 4:50 PM Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:00 AM Dominik Holler < >>> dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 8:57 PM Dominik Holler < >>> dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Dominik Holler < >>> dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 5:48 PM Nir Soffer < >>> nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019, 18:18 Marcin Sobczyk < >>> msobczyk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> On 11/22/19 4:54 PM, Martin Perina wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 4:43 PM Dominik Holler < >>> dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:17 PM Dominik Holler < >>> dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:00 PM Miguel Duarte de Mora >>> Barroso <mdbarroso(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:54 AM Vojtech Juranek < >>> vjuranek(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > On pátek 22. listopadu 2019 9:56:56 CET Miguel >>> Duarte de Mora Barroso wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 9:49 AM Vojtech Juranek < >>> vjuranek(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > On pátek 22. listopadu 2019 9:41:26 CET Dominik >>> Holler wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 8:40 AM Dominik >>> Holler <dholler(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 10:54 PM Nir Soffer >>> <nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:24 PM Vojtech >>> Juranek >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> <vjuranek(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> wrote: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Hi, >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > OST fails (see e.g. [1]) in >>> 002_bootstrap.check_update_host. It >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > fails >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> with >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > FAILED! => {"changed": false, >>> "failures": [], "msg": "Depsolve >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Error >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> occured: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > \n Problem 1: cannot install the best >>> update candidate for package >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > vdsm- >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> network-4.40.0-1236.git63ea8cb8b.el8.x86_64\n - nothing provides >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> nmstate >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > needed by >>> vdsm-network-4.40.0-1271.git524e08c8a.el8.x86_64\n >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Problem 2: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > package >>> vdsm-python-4.40.0-1271.git524e08c8a.el8.noarch requires >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> vdsm-network >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > = 4.40.0-1271.git524e08c8a.el8, but none >>> of the providers can be >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> installed\n >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > - cannot install the best update >>> candidate for package vdsm- >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> python-4.40.0-1236.git63ea8cb8b.el8.noarch\n - nothing provides >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > nmstate >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > needed by >>> vdsm-network-4.40.0-1271.git524e08c8a.el8.x86_64\n >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> nmstate should be provided by copr repo >>> enabled by >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ovirt-release-master. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > I re-triggered as >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6131 >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > maybe >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/104825/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > was missing >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > Looks like >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/104825/ is >>> ignored by OST. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > maybe not. You re-triggered with [1], which >>> really missed this patch. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > I did a rebase and now running with this patch >>> in build #6132 [2]. Let's >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > wait >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > for it to see if gerrit #104825 helps. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > [1] >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/standard-manual-runner/909/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > [2] >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6132/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > Miguel, do you think merging >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/104495/15/common/yum-repos/ovirt-master-hos >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > t-cq >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > .repo.in >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > would solve this? >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > I've split the patch Dominik mentions above in >>> two, one of them adding >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > the nmstate / networkmanager copr repos - [3]. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > Let's see if it fixes it. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > it fixes original issue, but OST still fails in >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > 098_ovirt_provider_ovn.use_ovn_provider: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6134 >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> I think Dominik was looking into this issue; +Dominik >>> Holler please confirm. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> Let me know if you need any help Dominik. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> Thanks. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> The problem is that the hosts lost connection to >>> storage: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6134/artifact/exp... >>> : >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> 2019-11-22 05:39:12,326-0500 DEBUG (jsonrpc/5) >>> [common.commands] /usr/bin/taskset --cpu-list 0-1 /usr/bin/sudo -n >>> /sbin/lvm vgs --config 'devices { preferred_names=["^/dev/mapper/"] >>> ignore_suspended_devices=1 write_cache_state=0 >>> disable_after_error_count=3 >>> filter=["a|^/dev/mapper/36001405107ea8b4e3ac4ddeb3e19890f$|^/dev/mapper/360014054924c91df75e41178e4b8a80c$|^/dev/mapper/3600140561c0d02829924b77ab7323f17$|^/dev/mapper/3600140582feebc04ca5409a99660dbbc$|^/dev/mapper/36001405c3c53755c13c474dada6be354$|", >>> "r|.*|"] } global { locking_type=1 prioritise_write_locks=1 >>> wait_for_locks=1 use_lvmetad=0 } backup { retain_min=50 retain_days=0 }' >>> --noheadings --units b --nosuffix --separator '|' --ignoreskippedcluster -o >>> uuid,name,attr,size,free,extent_size,extent_count,free_count,tags,vg_mda_size,vg_mda_free,lv_count,pv_count,pv_name >>> (cwd None) (commands:153) >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> 2019-11-22 05:39:12,415-0500 ERROR (check/loop) >>> [storage.Monitor] Error checking path /rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share2/d10879c6-8de1-40ba-87fa-f447844eed2a/dom_md/metadata >>> (monitor:501) >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> Traceback (most recent call last): >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> File >>> "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line 499, in >>> _pathChecked >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> delay = result.delay() >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> File >>> "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/check.py", line 391, in delay >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> raise exception.MiscFileReadException(self.path, >>> self.rc, self.err) >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> vdsm.storage.exception.MiscFileReadException: Internal >>> file read failure: ('/rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share2/d10879c6-8de1-40ba-87fa-f447844eed2a/dom_md/metadata', >>> 1, 'Read timeout') >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> 2019-11-22 05:39:12,416-0500 INFO (check/loop) >>> [storage.Monitor] Domain d10879c6-8de1-40ba-87fa-f447844eed2a became >>> INVALID (monitor:472) >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> I failed to reproduce local to analyze this, I will >>> try again, any hints welcome. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/104925/1/ shows that >>> 008_basic_ui_sanity.py triggers the problem. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> Is there someone with knowledge about the >>> basic_ui_sanity around? >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> How do you think it's related? By commenting out the ui >>> sanity tests and seeing OST with successful finish? >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Looking at 6134 run you were discussing: >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> - timing of the ui sanity set-up [1]: >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> 11:40:20 @ Run test: 008_basic_ui_sanity.py: >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> - timing of first encountered storage error [2]: >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> 2019-11-22 05:39:12,415-0500 ERROR (check/loop) >>> [storage.Monitor] Error checking path /rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share2/d10879c6-8de1-40ba-87fa-f447844eed2a/dom_md/metadata >>> (monitor:501) >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Traceback (most recent call last): >>> >> >> >> >>>>> File >>> "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line 499, in >>> _pathChecked >>> >> >> >> >>>>> delay = result.delay() >>> >> >> >> >>>>> File >>> "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/check.py", line 391, in delay >>> >> >> >> >>>>> raise exception.MiscFileReadException(self.path, >>> self.rc, self.err) >>> >> >> >> >>>>> vdsm.storage.exception.MiscFileReadException: Internal >>> file read failure: ('/rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share2/d10879c6-8de1-40ba-87fa-f447844eed2a/dom_md/metadata', >>> 1, 'Read timeout') >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Timezone difference aside, it seems to me that these >>> storage errors occured before doing anything ui-related. >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> You are right, a time.sleep(8*60) in >>> >> >> >> >> https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/104925/2 >>> >> >> >> >> has triggers the issue the same way. >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> So this is a test issues, assuming that the UI tests can >>> complete in >>> >> >> >> less than 8 minutes? >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > To my eyes this looks like storage is just stop working after >>> some time. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > Nir or Steve, can you please confirm that this is a storage >>> problem? >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Why do you think we have a storage problem? >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I understand from the posted log snippets that they say that >>> the storage is not accessible anymore, >>> >> >> >>> >> >> No, so far one read timeout was reported, this does not mean >>> storage >>> >> >> is not available anymore. >>> >> >> It can be temporary issue that does not harm anything. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > while the host is still responsive. >>> >> >> > This might be triggered by something outside storage, e.g. the >>> network providing the storage stopped working, >>> >> >> > But I think a possible next step in analysing this issue would >>> be to find the reason why storage is not happy. >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > Sounds like there was a miscommunication in this thread. >>> >> > I try to address all of your points, please let me know if >>> something is missing or not clearly expressed. >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> First step is to understand which test fails, >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > 098_ovirt_provider_ovn.use_ovn_provider >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> and why. This can be done by the owner of the test, >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > The test was added by the network team. >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> understanding what the test does >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > The test tries to add a vNIC. >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> and what is the expected system behavior. >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > It is expected that adding a vNIC works, because the VM should be >>> up. >>> >> >>> >> What was the actual behavior? >>> >> >>> >> >> If the owner of the test thinks that the test failed because of a >>> storage issue >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > I am not sure who is the owner, but I do. >>> >> >>> >> Can you explain why how a vNIC failed because of a storage issue? >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > Test fails with: >>> > >>> > Cannot add a Network Interface when VM is not Down, Up or >>> Image-Locked. >>> > >>> > engine.log says: >>> > {"jsonrpc": "2.0", "method": >>> "|virt|VM_status|308bd254-9af9-4570-98ea-822609550acf", "params": >>> {"308bd254-9af9-4570-98ea-822609550acf": {"status": "Paused", "pauseCode": >>> "EOTHER", "ioerror": {"alias": "ua-953dd722-5e8b-4b24-bccd-a2a5d5befeb6", >>> "name": "vda", "path": >>> "/rhev/data-center/38c691d4-8556-4882-8f04-a88dff5d0973/bcd1622c-876b-460c-95a7-d09536c42ffe/images/953dd722-5e8b-4b24-bccd-a2a5d5befeb6/dcb5fec4-f219-4d3f-986c-628b0d00b349"}}, >>> "notify_time": 4298388570}} >>> >>> So you think adding vNIC failed because the VM was paused? >>> >>> >> Yes, because of the error message "Cannot add a Network Interface when >> VM is not Down, Up or Image-Locked." >> >> >>> > vdsm.log says: >>> > >>> > 2019-11-20 10:51:06,026-0500 ERROR (check/loop) [storage.Monitor] >>> Error checking path /rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share1/bcd1622c-876b-460c-95a7-d09536c42ffe/dom_md/metadata >>> (monitor:501) >>> > Traceback (most recent call last): >>> > File "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", >>> line 499, in _pathChecked >>> > delay = result.delay() >>> > File "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/check.py", line >>> 391, in delay >>> > raise exception.MiscFileReadException(self.path, self.rc, >>> self.err) >>> > vdsm.storage.exception.MiscFileReadException: Internal file read >>> failure: ('/rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share1/bcd1622c-876b-460c-95a7-d09536c42ffe/dom_md/metadata', >>> 1, 'Read timeout') >>> >>> Is this related to the paused vm? >>> >>> >> The log entry : '{"status": "Paused", "pauseCode": "EOTHER", "ioerror"' >> makes me thinking this. >> >> >>> You did not provide a timestamp for the engine event above. >>> >>> >> >> I can't find last weeks log, maybe they are faded out already. >> Please find more recent logs in >> >> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_standard-check-patch/6492 >> >> >> >>> > ... >>> > >>> > 2019-11-20 10:51:56,249-0500 WARN (check/loop) [storage.check] >>> Checker '/rhev/data-center/mnt/192.168.200.4:_exports_nfs_share2/64daa060-1d83-46b9-b7e8-72a902e1134b/dom_md/metadata' >>> is blocked for 60.00 seconds (check:282) >>> > 2019-11-20 10:51:56,885-0500 ERROR (monitor/775b710) >>> [storage.Monitor] Error checking domain >>> 775b7102-7f2c-4eee-a4d0-a41b55451f7e (monitor:427) >>> > Traceback (most recent call last): >>> > File "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", >>> line 408, in _checkDomainStatus >>> > self.domain.selftest() >>> > File "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/fileSD.py", >>> line 710, in selftest >>> > self.oop.os.statvfs(self.domaindir) >>> > File >>> "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/vdsm/storage/outOfProcess.py", line 242, >>> in statvfs >>> > return self._iop.statvfs(path) >>> > File "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ioprocess/__init__.py", line >>> 479, in statvfs >>> > resdict = self._sendCommand("statvfs", {"path": path}, >>> self.timeout) >>> > File "/usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ioprocess/__init__.py", line >>> 442, in _sendCommand >>> > raise Timeout(os.strerror(errno.ETIMEDOUT)) >>> > ioprocess.Timeout: Connection timed out >>> >>> This show that storage was not accessible for 60 seconds (ioprocess >>> uses 60 seconds timeout). >>> >>> 60 seconds timeout is bad. If we have leases on this storage domain >>> (e.g. SPM lease) they will >>> expire in 20 seconds after this event and the vdsm on the SPM host >>> will be killed. >>> >>> Do we have network tests changing the network used by the NFS storage >>> domain before this event? >>> >>> >> No. >> >> >>> What were the changes the network tests or code since OST was >>> successful? >>> >>> >> I am not aware of a change, which might be relevant. >> Maybe the fact that the hosts are on CentOS 8, while the Engine >> (storage) is on CentOS 7 is relevant. >> Also the occurrence of this issue seems not to be 100% deterministic, I >> guess because it is timing related. >> >> The error is reproducible locally by running OST, and just keep the >> environment alive after basic-suite-master succeeded. >> After some time, the storage will become inaccessible. >> >> >>> >> Can you explain how adding 8 minutes sleep instead of the UI tests >>> >> reproduced the issue? >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > This shows that the issue is not triggered by the UI test, but maybe >>> by passing time. >>> >>> Do we run the ovn tests after the UI tests? >>> >>> >> >> someone from storage can look at this. >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > Thanks, I would appreciate this. >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> But the fact that adding long sleep reproduce the issue means it >>> is not related >>> >> >> in any way to storage. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Nir >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> I remember talking with Steven Rosenberg on IRC a couple >>> of days ago about some storage metadata issues and he said he got a >>> response from Nir, that "it's a known issue". >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Nir, Amit, can you comment on this? >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> The error mentioned here is not vdsm error but warning >>> about storage accessibility. We sould convert the tracebacks to warning. >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> The reason for such issue can be misconfigured network >>> (maybe network team is testing negative flows?), >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> No. >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> or some issue in the NFS server. >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> Only hint I found is >>> >> >> >> >>> "Exiting Time2Retain handler because >>> session_reinstatement=1" >>> >> >> >> >>> but I have no idea what this means or if this is relevant >>> at all. >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> One read timeout is not an issue. We have a real issue >>> only if we have consistent read timeouts or errors for couple of minutes, >>> after that engine can deactivate the storage domain or some hosts if only >>> these hosts are having trouble to access storage. >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> In OST we never expect such conditions since we don't >>> test negative flows, and we should have good connectivity with the vms >>> running on the same host. >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> Ack, this seems to be the problem. >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> Nir >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> [1] >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6134/console >>> >> >> >> >>>>> [2] >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6134/artifact/exp... >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Marcin, could you please take a look? >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > [3] - https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/104897/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Who installs this rpm in OST? >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > I do not understand the question. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > [...] >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > See [2] for full error. >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Can someone please take a look? >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Thanks >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Vojta >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > [1] >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6128/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > [2] >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/6128/artifact >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> / >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>> exported-artifacts/test_logs/basic-suite-master/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> post-002_bootstrap.py/lago- >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> basic-suite-master-engine/_var_log/ovirt-engine/engine.log___________ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ____ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ________________________________>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Devel mailing list -- devel(a)ovirt.org >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > To unsubscribe send an email to >>> devel-leave(a)ovirt.org >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Privacy Statement: >>> https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > oVirt Code of Conduct: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > List Archives: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/4K5N3VQ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> N26B >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> L73K7D45A2IR7R3UMMM23/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Devel mailing list -- devel(a)ovirt.org >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> To unsubscribe send an email to >>> devel-leave(a)ovirt.org >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Privacy Statement: >>> https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> oVirt Code of Conduct: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> List Archives: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/JN7MNUZ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> N5K3 >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> NS5TGXFCILYES77KI5TZU/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > Devel mailing list -- devel(a)ovirt.org >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > To unsubscribe send an email to >>> devel-leave(a)ovirt.org >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > Privacy Statement: >>> https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > oVirt Code of Conduct: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ List >>> Archives: >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > >>> https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/UPJ5SEAV5Z65H >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > > 5BQ3SCHOYZX6JMTQPBW/ >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> > >>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> -- >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Martin Perina >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Manager, Software Engineering >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Red Hat Czech s.r.o. >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>> >>> > > -- > Martin Perina > Manager, Software Engineering > Red Hat Czech s.r.o. > > >