[Stgt-devel] Errors in fsck with iSER

[Erez Zilber]

>>>>>>     
>>>>>>             
>>>>> I merged all the patches. Now mainline tgt supports iSER. Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> I also applied some patches that could break iSER support. iSER
>>>>> people, please test the latest tree.
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> We ran some tests on it. Most of them are ok except for fsck. We ran it
>>>> in the following way:
>>>>
>>>> seed5:/tmp/regtest # parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 0 8500
>>>> seed5:/tmp/regtest # for ((i=1;i<=1000;i++)) do mkfs -t ext2 -q
>>>> /dev/sdb1; fsck -y -ft ext2 /dev/sdb1; echo iteration $i is done; done
>>>>
>>>> fsck is ok most of the time, but once in a while it looks like this
>>>> (after ~300 iterations):
>>>>
>>>> fsck 1.38 (30-Jun-2005)
>>>> e2fsck 1.38 (30-Jun-2005)
>>>> Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
>>>> Pass 2: Checking directory structure
>>>> Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
>>>> Pass 4: Checking reference counts
>>>> Pass 5: Checking group summary information
>>>> /dev/sdb1: 11/1038336 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 32599/2075195 blocks
>>>> seed5:/tmp/regtest # mkfs -t ext2 -q /dev/sdb1
>>>> seed5:/tmp/regtest # fsck -y -ft ext2 /dev/sdb1
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Sounds like data corruption. Do you see the same problem with IPoIB?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Stgt-devel mailing list
>>> Stgt-devel at lists.berlios.de
>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/stgt-devel
>>>   
>>>       
>> Hi,
>> I'm working with Erez and I tried this with tcp session and there 
>> weren't any problems.
>>     
>
> Thanks for confirming. So it's the iSER problem.
>
> I might break Pete's iSER code so can you revoke the latest three
> patches and try the same tests?
>
>
> rouen:~/git/tgt$ git-reset --hard HEAD~3
> HEAD is now at 224ca81... iscsi: add iser support
>
> rouen:~/git/tgt$ git-log |head -5
> commit 224ca81bca8dead8dd355d62422e11fe23f7bdc4
> Author: Pete Wyckoff <pw at osc.edu>
> Date:   Mon Dec 10 10:06:27 2007 -0500
>
>
> Thanks,
>   

Yes, I still see the same bad behavior with iSER. Pete & Robin - can you
try to run the same test (see above) with iSER and see if you get the
same behavior?

Thanks,
Erez