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.

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

DAOS-16211 vos: Avoid race condition with discard (#15370) #15432

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 5, 2024

Conversation

jolivier23
Copy link
Contributor

There is a possible race between aggregation deleting the object tree and discard working on the same
object tree. Add a check to avoid this race

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.

@jolivier23 jolivier23 requested review from a team as code owners October 30, 2024 14:31
@jolivier23 jolivier23 added the unclean-cherry-pick Indicates that a cherry-pick had merge conflicts that needed resolving. label Oct 30, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 30, 2024

Ticket title is 'Assertion in VOS aggregation (close_merge_window() Assertion '(mw->mw_rmv_cnt == 0)' )'
Status is 'In Progress'
Labels: 'daos_ecb_issue,daos_ecb_scale,soak,triaged,request_for_2.6.2'
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-16211

There is a possible race between aggregation deleting
the object tree and discard working on the same
object tree.  Add a check to avoid this race

Signed-off-by: Jeff Olivier <[email protected]>
NiuYawei
NiuYawei previously approved these changes Oct 30, 2024
Address clang-format issue on block

Signed-off-by: Jeff Olivier <[email protected]>
another minor edit

Signed-off-by: Jeff Olivier <[email protected]>
@daosbuild1
Copy link
Collaborator

Test stage Functional Hardware Medium completed with status FAILURE. https://build.hpdd.intel.com/job/daos-stack/job/daos/job/PR-15432/4/display/redirect

@daosbuild1
Copy link
Collaborator

Test stage Functional Hardware Medium Verbs Provider completed with status FAILURE. https://build.hpdd.intel.com/job/daos-stack/job/daos/job/PR-15432/4/display/redirect

@gnailzenh gnailzenh merged commit d17d3d6 into release/2.6 Nov 5, 2024
51 of 54 checks passed
@gnailzenh gnailzenh deleted the jvolivie/bp_race branch November 5, 2024 08:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
unclean-cherry-pick Indicates that a cherry-pick had merge conflicts that needed resolving.
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants