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-16876 vos: remove DTX record after partial commit #15857

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 10, 2025
Merged

DAOS-16876 vos: remove DTX record after partial commit #15857

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 10, 2025

Conversation

Nasf-Fan
Copy link
Contributor

@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan commented Feb 7, 2025

Otherwise, the partial committed DTX entry will be re-committed when reopen the container. Then access related dangling DTX record(s) may trigger assertion and cause corruption.

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.

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025

Ticket title is 'LRZ: m02r01s07dao engine coredumps with vos EMRG src/vos/ilog.c:411 ilog_open() Assertion'
Status is 'In Progress'
Labels: 'LRZ,google-cloud-daos'
Job should run at elevated priority (1)
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-16876

@github-actions github-actions bot added the priority Ticket has high priority (automatically managed) label Feb 7, 2025
@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan force-pushed the Nasf-Fan/DAOS-16876_2 branch from 9d4612b to d2c61ff Compare February 7, 2025 07:30
@daosbuild1
Copy link
Collaborator

Test stage Unit Test with memcheck on EL 8.8 completed with status UNSTABLE. https://build.hpdd.intel.com/job/daos-stack/job/daos//view/change-requests/job/PR-15857/4/testReport/

@daosbuild1
Copy link
Collaborator

Test stage Unit Test bdev with memcheck on EL 8.8 completed with status UNSTABLE. https://build.hpdd.intel.com/job/daos-stack/job/daos//view/change-requests/job/PR-15857/4/testReport/

NiuYawei
NiuYawei previously approved these changes Feb 7, 2025
View reviewed changes
src/vos/vos_dtx.c
@@ -685,50 +685,64 @@ dtx_rec_release(struct vos_container *cont, struct vos_dtx_act_ent *dae, bool ab

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It looks to me this dtx_rec_release() changes both pmem and dram data, if something failed in the middle, do we need to rollback dram changes to keep pmem and dram data consistent?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we will change on-disk layout firstly, then the DRAM changes during post_handle(). Please check the latest commit.

src/vos/vos_dtx.c Outdated
}

if (keep_act) {
if (count > 0) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks to me the count must be > 0, it's better to add a D_ASSERT(count > 0) before line 176?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

When re-commit former partial committed DTX, the count will be zero.

gnailzenh
gnailzenh previously approved these changes Feb 7, 2025
View reviewed changes
@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan dismissed stale reviews from gnailzenh and NiuYawei via ee8797a February 7, 2025 13:19
@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan force-pushed the Nasf-Fan/DAOS-16876_2 branch from d2c61ff to ee8797a Compare February 7, 2025 13:19
jolivier23
jolivier23 previously approved these changes Feb 7, 2025
View reviewed changes
NiuYawei
NiuYawei previously approved these changes Feb 8, 2025
View reviewed changes
@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan dismissed stale reviews from NiuYawei and jolivier23 via c954472 February 8, 2025 04:09
@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan force-pushed the Nasf-Fan/DAOS-16876_2 branch 2 times, most recently from c954472 to 01d3be3 Compare February 8, 2025 04:28
@Nasf-Fan
DAOS-16876 vos: remove DTX record after partial commit
2c0c480 
Otherwise, the partial committed DTX entry will be re-committed when
reopen the container. Then access related dangling DTX record(s) may
trigger assertion and cause corruption.

Signed-off-by: Fan Yong <[email protected]>
@Nasf-Fan Nasf-Fan force-pushed the Nasf-Fan/DAOS-16876_2 branch from 01d3be3 to 2c0c480 Compare February 10, 2025 02:09
@mchaarawi mchaarawi marked this pull request as ready for review February 10, 2025 21:06
@mchaarawi mchaarawi requested review from a team as code owners February 10, 2025 21:06
@mchaarawi mchaarawi requested a review from a team as a code owner February 10, 2025 21:06
@mchaarawi mchaarawi requested a review from a team February 10, 2025 21:06
@mchaarawi mchaarawi merged commit e5fa434 into master Feb 10, 2025
57 of 58 checks passed
@mchaarawi mchaarawi deleted the Nasf-Fan/DAOS-16876_2 branch February 10, 2025 21:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@janekmi janekmi janekmi approved these changes

@gnailzenh gnailzenh gnailzenh approved these changes

@jolivier23 jolivier23 jolivier23 approved these changes

@NiuYawei NiuYawei NiuYawei left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
priority Ticket has high priority (automatically managed)
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@Nasf-Fan @daosbuild1 @janekmi @NiuYawei @gnailzenh @jolivier23 @mchaarawi