Ubuntu Disco with most recent Kernel 5.0.0-32 seems to be instable
Hi all, it seems Ceph on Ubuntu Disco (19.04) with the most recent kernel 5.0.0-32 is instable. It crashes sometimes after a few hours, sometimes even after a few minutes. I found this bug here on CoreOS: https://github.com/coreos/bugs/issues/2616 Which is exactly also the error message I get ("cache_from_obj: Wrong slab cache. inode_cache but object is from ceph_inode_info") and the problem seems fairly recent. The problem vanished immediately after downgrading the kernel again. Could it be that this isn't exclusively a CoreOS issue? Where should I file this? Ubuntu Launchpad? Seems quite serious issue to me... Thank you / BR Ranjan
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 5:09 PM Ranjan Ghosh <ghosh@pw6.de> wrote:
Hi all,
it seems Ceph on Ubuntu Disco (19.04) with the most recent kernel 5.0.0-32 is instable. It crashes sometimes after a few hours, sometimes even after a few minutes. I found this bug here on CoreOS:
https://github.com/coreos/bugs/issues/2616
Which is exactly also the error message I get ("cache_from_obj: Wrong slab cache. inode_cache but object is from ceph_inode_info") and the problem seems fairly recent.
The problem vanished immediately after downgrading the kernel again.
Hi Ranjan, Which kernel did you downgrade to? Looking at the changelog, disco's 5.0.0-32 kernel has the botched backport mentioned in the coreos issue you linked to. Downgrading to 5.0.0-31 should help, until disco picks up the fix (either just the revert or the revert plus the new backport). Revert "ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource" ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource Thanks, Ilya
Hi Ilya, thanks for your answer - really helpful! We were so desparate today due to this bug that we downgraded to -23. But it's very good to know that -31 doesnt contain this bug and we could safely update back to this release. If a new version (say -33 is released): How/Where can I find out if it contains the fix? Except of trying and having it crash, of course - which I'm obviously very reluctant to do... And, one more question if I may: Would that problem also show up on Eoan (Ubuntu 19.10) which has been released a few days ago if we used the most recent Kernel there? I think it's 5.3.0-something if I'm not mistaken... Thank you / BR Ranjan Am 21.10.19 um 17:43 schrieb Ilya Dryomov:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 5:09 PM Ranjan Ghosh <ghosh@pw6.de> wrote:
Hi all,
it seems Ceph on Ubuntu Disco (19.04) with the most recent kernel 5.0.0-32 is instable. It crashes sometimes after a few hours, sometimes even after a few minutes. I found this bug here on CoreOS:
https://github.com/coreos/bugs/issues/2616
Which is exactly also the error message I get ("cache_from_obj: Wrong slab cache. inode_cache but object is from ceph_inode_info") and the problem seems fairly recent.
The problem vanished immediately after downgrading the kernel again. Hi Ranjan,
Which kernel did you downgrade to?
Looking at the changelog, disco's 5.0.0-32 kernel has the botched backport mentioned in the coreos issue you linked to. Downgrading to 5.0.0-31 should help, until disco picks up the fix (either just the revert or the revert plus the new backport).
Revert "ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource" ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource
Thanks,
Ilya
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 6:12 PM Ranjan Ghosh <ghosh@pw6.de> wrote:
Hi Ilya,
thanks for your answer - really helpful! We were so desparate today due to this bug that we downgraded to -23. But it's very good to know that -31 doesnt contain this bug and we could safely update back to this release.
If a new version (say -33 is released): How/Where can I find out if it contains the fix? Except of trying and having it crash, of course - which I'm obviously very reluctant to do...
Look at the changelog of the kernel package ("apt changelog" or similar). The changelog for 5.0.0-32 has - ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource You want see something along the lines of - Revert "ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource" - ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource The first line is a revert of the incorrect backport and the second line is the correct backport. Having the correct backport in place isn't strictly necessary, so as long as you see a revert it should work fine.
And, one more question if I may: Would that problem also show up on Eoan (Ubuntu 19.10) which has been released a few days ago if we used the most recent Kernel there? I think it's 5.3.0-something if I'm not mistaken...
Anything based on 5.3 should be fine -- this is the kernel the original patch went into. The problem is how the original patch was backported, not that patch itself. Thanks, Ilya
Understood. Perfect. Thanks again for all the information! BR Ranjan Am 21.10.19 um 19:07 schrieb Ilya Dryomov:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 6:12 PM Ranjan Ghosh <ghosh@pw6.de> wrote:
Hi Ilya,
thanks for your answer - really helpful! We were so desparate today due to this bug that we downgraded to -23. But it's very good to know that -31 doesnt contain this bug and we could safely update back to this release.
If a new version (say -33 is released): How/Where can I find out if it contains the fix? Except of trying and having it crash, of course - which I'm obviously very reluctant to do... Look at the changelog of the kernel package ("apt changelog" or similar). The changelog for 5.0.0-32 has
- ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource
You want see something along the lines of
- Revert "ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource" - ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource
The first line is a revert of the incorrect backport and the second line is the correct backport. Having the correct backport in place isn't strictly necessary, so as long as you see a revert it should work fine.
And, one more question if I may: Would that problem also show up on Eoan (Ubuntu 19.10) which has been released a few days ago if we used the most recent Kernel there? I think it's 5.3.0-something if I'm not mistaken... Anything based on 5.3 should be fine -- this is the kernel the original patch went into. The problem is how the original patch was backported, not that patch itself.
Thanks,
Ilya
participants (2)
-
Ilya Dryomov
-
Ranjan Ghosh