th@llnl.gov
2006-Dec-20 18:23 UTC
[Lustre-devel] [Bug 11470] cache_remove_extents_from_lock()) ASSERTION(lock)
Please don''t reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by using the following link: https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11470 Created an attachment (id=9194) Please don''t reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by using the following link: --> (https://bugzilla.lustre.org/attachment.cgi?id=9194&action=view) console log snippets from zeus 105, 223, and 243
behlendorf1@llnl.gov
2006-Dec-20 20:31 UTC
[Lustre-devel] [Bug 11470] cache_remove_extents_from_lock()) ASSERTION(lock)
Please don''t reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by using the following link: https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11470 What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|cache_remove_extents_from_lo|cache_remove_extents_from_lo |ck()) ASSERTION(lock) |ck()) ASSERTION(lock) This assertion was added by the bug10718-0.8.3.diff which we have applied to this tree. The only way I can see this can happen is if the client is evicted just before the assertion.
green@clusterfs.com
2007-Jan-05 17:21 UTC
[Lustre-devel] [Bug 11470] cache_remove_extents_from_lock()) ASSERTION(lock)
Please don''t reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by using the following link: https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11470 Created an attachment (id=9284) Please don''t reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by using the following link: --> (https://bugzilla.lustre.org/attachment.cgi?id=9284&action=view) Check that locks handles are valid. This patch ensures lock handles resolve to valid locks before using those locks. If lockhandle is invalid - that means locks just gone away (eviction?) and nothing should be done