Re: 2.6.xx: NFS: directory motion/cam2 contains a readdir loop

[Trond Myklebust]

On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 18:44 -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote: 
> 
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 16:54 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 16:37 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 15:47 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 03:44:20PM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 03:35:01PM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Currently I do not see any dupes, however I have a script that moves
> > >>>>>>> images out of the directory once an hour:
> > >>>>>>> 0 * * * * /usr/local/bin/move_to_old2.sh > /dev/null 2>&1
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Do you keep adding files to the directory while you move files out?
> > >>>>> Yes, otherwise there are too many files in the directory and viewers, e.g.,
> > >>>>> each geeqie (picture viewer) will use > 4-6GB of memory, so I try to keep
> > >>>>> it around 5,000 pictures or less.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> What's the rate of additions/removals to the directory?
> > >>>>> Additions it depends, around 5,000 over a 12hr period, 416/hr, current:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> atom:/d1/motion# find cam1|wc
> > >>>>>    5215    5215  166853
> > >>>>> atom:/d1/motion# find cam2|wc
> > >>>>>    5069    5069  162181
> > >>>>> atom:/d1/motion# find cam3|wc
> > >>>>>    5594    5594  178981
> > >>>>> atom:/d1/motion#
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This sounds a lot like xfs simply filling up the directory index slots
> > >>>> of files that you just moved out with new files, and nfs falsely
> > >>>> claiming that this is a problem.
> > >>>
> > >>> Yep. There is an existing bugzilla report for this bug at
> > >>>
> > >>>    https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38572
> > >>>
> > >>> I have a preliminary patch there that attempts to turn off the loop
> > >>> detection when the directory is seen to change, however that patch still
> > >>> appears to have a bug in it, and I haven't had time to figure out what
> > >>> is wrong yet.
> > >>>
> > >>> Can you perhaps take a look, Bryan?
> > >>
> > >> Actually, Justin, can you test the following slight variant on the patch
> > >> in the bugzilla?
> > >
> > > Doh! This one will actually compile....
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Should I try 3.0 first or retry 2.6.38 w/ this patch?
> > 
> > Justin.
> > 
> >
> 
> I'll give 3.0 a go first.

I had Bryan do some more tests, which revealed a couple more issues. The
attached patch should fix those, and has resisted everything we've
thrown at it so far. It should apply to 2.6.39 and newer.

Cheers
  Trond
8<-----------------------------------------------------------------------