Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f173.google.com ([209.85.220.173]:33896 "EHLO mail-qk0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757588AbcJXPTl (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 11:19:41 -0400 Received: by mail-qk0-f173.google.com with SMTP id x11so33092128qka.1 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 08:19:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1477322377.14828.4.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: upstream server crash From: Jeff Layton To: Chuck Lever Cc: Eryu Guan , "J. Bruce Fields" , Linux NFS Mailing List Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 11:19:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <7B3F94BF-CAA1-4001-BEBC-C93965A81DE4@oracle.com> References: <20161023182115.GA14481@fieldses.org> <20161024031519.GN2462@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> <1477315868.2625.37.camel@redhat.com> <7B3F94BF-CAA1-4001-BEBC-C93965A81DE4@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 09:51 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > > > On Oct 24, 2016, at 9:31 AM, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 11:15 +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 02:21:15PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm getting an intermittent crash in the nfs server as of > > > > 68778945e46f143ed7974b427a8065f69a4ce944 "SUNRPC: Separate buffer > > > > pointers for RPC Call and Reply messages". > > > > > > > > I haven't tried to understand that commit or why it would be a problem yet, I > > > > don't see an obvious connection--I can take a closer look Monday. > > > > > > > > Could even be that I just landed on this commit by chance, the problem is a > > > > little hard to reproduce so I don't completely trust my testing. > > > > > > I've hit the same crash on 4.9-rc1 kernel, and it's reproduced for me > > > reliably by running xfstests generic/013 case, on a loopback mounted > > > NFSv4.1 (or NFSv4.2), XFS is the underlying exported fs. More details > > > please see > > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=147714320129362&w=2 > > > > > > > Looks like you landed at the same commit as Bruce, so that's probably > > legit. That commit is very small though. The only real change that > > doesn't affect the new field is this: > > > > > > @@ -1766,7 +1766,7 @@ rpc_xdr_encode(struct rpc_task *task) > > req->rq_buffer, > > req->rq_callsize); > > xdr_buf_init(&req->rq_rcv_buf, > > - (char *)req->rq_buffer + req->rq_callsize, > > + req->rq_rbuffer, > > req->rq_rcvsize); > > > > > > So I'm guessing this is breaking the callback channel somehow? > > Could be the TCP backchannel code is using rq_buffer in a different > way than RDMA backchannel or the forward channel code. > Well, it basically allocates a page per rpc_rqst and then maps that. One thing I notice is that this patch ensures that rq_rbuffer gets set up in rpc_malloc and xprt_rdma_allocate, but it looks like xprt_alloc_bc_req didn't get the same treatment. I suspect that that may be the problem... -- Jeff Layton