Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

DAOS-14013 rebuild: add a basic UT for incremental reint #15782

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

DAOS-14013 rebuild: add a basic UT for incremental reint #15782

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

liuxuezhao
Copy link
Contributor

Fix a migrated cont tree open handle bug.

Before requesting gatekeeper:

  • Two review approvals and any prior change requests have been resolved.
  • Testing is complete and all tests passed or there is a reason documented in the PR why it should be force landed and forced-landing tag is set.
  • Features: (or Test-tag*) commit pragma was used or there is a reason documented that there are no appropriate tags for this PR.
  • Commit messages follows the guidelines outlined here.
  • Any tests skipped by the ticket being addressed have been run and passed in the PR.

Gatekeeper:

  • You are the appropriate gatekeeper to be landing the patch.
  • The PR has 2 reviews by people familiar with the code, including appropriate owners.
  • Githooks were used. If not, request that user install them and check copyright dates.
  • Checkpatch issues are resolved. Pay particular attention to ones that will show up on future PRs.
  • All builds have passed. Check non-required builds for any new compiler warnings.
  • Sufficient testing is done. Check feature pragmas and test tags and that tests skipped for the ticket are run and now pass with the changes.
  • If applicable, the PR has addressed any potential version compatibility issues.
  • Check the target branch. If it is master branch, should the PR go to a feature branch? If it is a release branch, does it have merge approval in the JIRA ticket.
  • Extra checks if forced landing is requested
    • Review comments are sufficiently resolved, particularly by prior reviewers that requested changes.
    • No new NLT or valgrind warnings. Check the classic view.
    • Quick-build or Quick-functional is not used.
  • Fix the commit message upon landing. Check the standard here. Edit it to create a single commit. If necessary, ask submitter for a new summary.

@liuxuezhao liuxuezhao requested review from a team as code owners January 24, 2025 12:51
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 24, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Ticket title is 'Validate functionality of incremental reintegration'
Status is 'In Progress'
Labels: 'test_2.8'
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-14013

@liuxuezhao liuxuezhao requested a review from gnailzenh January 24, 2025 12:55
daltonbohning
daltonbohning reviewed Jan 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@daltonbohning daltonbohning left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ftest LGTM

@liuxuezhao liuxuezhao requested a review from Nasf-Fan January 24, 2025 16:07
@liuxuezhao liuxuezhao mentioned this pull request Jan 25, 2025
Open
18 tasks
Nasf-Fan
Nasf-Fan reviewed Jan 25, 2025
View reviewed changes
src/object/srv_obj_migrate.c
cont_root = tmp_iov.iov_buf;
*cont_toh = cont_root->tcr_root_hdl;
return 0;
rc = dbtree_open_inplace(&cont_root->tcr_btr_root, &uma, &migrated_toh);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need to check if (daos_handle_is_inval(&cont_root->tcr_root_hdl)) before open?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since the above code at L3952 the container lookup succeed, it means the container must with OID being migrated, then the container's migrated obj tree should have already been created.
Can add an assertion the handle is valid although, I'll add it.

DAOS-14013 rebuild: add a basic UT for incremental reint
ac949d4 
Fix a migrated cont tree open handle bug.

Signed-off-by: Xuezhao Liu <[email protected]>
@liuxuezhao liuxuezhao requested a review from Nasf-Fan January 25, 2025 17:39
Nasf-Fan
Nasf-Fan reviewed Jan 26, 2025
View reviewed changes
src/object/srv_obj_migrate.c
@@ -3962,6 +3962,7 @@ obj_tree_lookup_cont(daos_handle_t toh, uuid_t co_uuid, daos_handle_t *cont_toh)
memset(&uma, 0, sizeof(uma));
uma.uma_id = UMEM_CLASS_VMEM;
cont_root = tmp_iov.iov_buf;
D_ASSERT(daos_handle_is_valid(cont_root->tcr_root_hdl));
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some confused, since it is already opened, why need to open again?

@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan self-requested a review January 27, 2025 15:35
@gnailzenh
Copy link
Contributor

@kccain could you prioritize review of this patch? It is a 2.8 blocker, thanks

kccain
kccain reviewed Jan 28, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@kccain kccain left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Took a look at src/tests/suite code and have some questions, nothing blocking. Adding my +1 on the patch now in parallel to the discussion of the questions that shouldn't cause any blocking issue from my point of view.

src/tests/suite/daos_rebuild_common.c
@@ -436,6 +437,11 @@ rebuild_io_obj_internal(struct ioreq *req, bool validate, int index)
int k;
int l;

if (dt_no_punch) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this intended to also skip the record punch on line 483 below under the condition (l == rec_punch_idx) ? It seems this logic will not prevent it. Maybe it is ultimately not too important if that punch_single() call is made. Just curious/asking.

src/tests/suite/daos_test_common.c
@@ -395,6 +402,18 @@ test_setup(void **state, unsigned int step, bool multi_rank,
arg->pool.destroyed = false;
}

/** Look at variables set by test arguments and setup pool props */
if (dt_incr_reint) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

dt_incr_reint isn't set anywhere that I can see. Is this meant for future use when there might be a specific setup function for incremental reintegration test cases?

src/tests/suite/daos_rebuild.c
update_oids[i] = daos_test_oid_gen(arg->coh, OC_RP_3GX, 0, 0, arg->myrank);
rebuild_io(arg, update_oids, OBJ_NR);

reintegrate_single_pool_rank(arg, 5, true);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

question: what is the expectation for the global minimum stable epoch of the container when the reintegration happens. Is it expected that none of the oids data in engine rank 5 storage will be wiped during this reintegration? Or, is it expected that maybe some of rank 5 data will be wiped as part of the reintegration, because maybe it falls later than the global minimum stable epoch?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@daltonbohning daltonbohning daltonbohning left review comments

@kccain kccain kccain approved these changes

@NiuYawei NiuYawei Awaiting requested review from NiuYawei

@gnailzenh gnailzenh Awaiting requested review from gnailzenh

@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan Awaiting requested review from Nasf-Fan

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@liuxuezhao @gnailzenh @daltonbohning @Nasf-Fan @kccain