Hi,
Gentle reminder ! Please let me know if there are any pointers for this
Thanks Santhosh
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 7:26 PM santhosh kumar santhosh.santuu@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
We migrated from redhat 5.3 to centos 7.5 and facing crashes in longevity tests
All of them point to below reason,
list_del corruption. next->prev should be ffff880c1e567000, but was 00450008a948adba
We searched around web and see this is fixed in redhat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028750
But don't see any fix in Centos. https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=10944
Is this the fact ? What is the general practice ? Can we port the fix from redhat and upstream for Centos ?
Please give me some guidance.
Thanks Santhosh
Gentle reminder ! Please let me know if there are any pointers for this
As far as I can see your original message never made it on to the mailing list ...
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 7:26 PM santhosh kumar santhosh.santuu@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
We migrated from redhat 5.3 to centos 7.5 and facing crashes in longevity tests
Why not 7.6??
All of them point to below reason,
list_del corruption. next->prev should be ffff880c1e567000, but was 00450008a948adba
We searched around web and see this is fixed in redhat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028750
But don't see any fix in Centos. https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=10944
Is this the fact ? What is the general practice ? Can we port the fix from redhat and upstream for Centos ?
CentOS is a clone of RHEL - if it is fixed in RHEL 7 it will be fixed in CentOS 7. CentOS doesn't "fix" things as such as that would break compatibility with RHEL.
There may be some 3rd party repo that provides a newer kernel that fixes the issue.
P.
On Fri, 17 May 2019, Pete Biggs wrote:
CentOS is a clone of RHEL - if it is fixed in RHEL 7 it will be fixed in CentOS 7. CentOS doesn't "fix" things as such as that would break compatibility with RHEL.
There may be some 3rd party repo that provides a newer kernel that fixes the issue.
I'd go further.
It's also a kernel bug in btrfs, which given btrfs has only ever been a Technology Preview in RHEL, and was moved to being a deprecated feature in 7.4, I'd suggest that you shouldn't be looking for upstream support on btrfs.
If you're tinkering with btrfs, don't be surprised at having to use a kernel from elsewhere, as suggested by Pete.
RHEL advice would clearly be not to use btrfs.
jh
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 3:17 AM John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
RHEL advice would clearly be not to use btrfs.
I'm curious, is there anything in RHEL 8 that would replace BTRFS or ZFS? I'm experimenting with BTRFS on one system and the snapshot and subvolume features are nice.
Jim
On Fri, 17 May 2019, James Szinger wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 3:17 AM John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
RHEL advice would clearly be not to use btrfs.
I'm curious, is there anything in RHEL 8 that would replace BTRFS or ZFS? I'm experimenting with BTRFS on one system and the snapshot and subvolume features are nice.
I assume Stratis is the general answer.
jh
On May 17, 2019, at 9:53 AM, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 17 May 2019, James Szinger wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 3:17 AM John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
RHEL advice would clearly be not to use btrfs.
I'm curious, is there anything in RHEL 8 that would replace BTRFS or ZFS? I'm experimenting with BTRFS on one system and the snapshot and subvolume features are nice.
I assume Stratis is the general answer.
It looks like built-in RAID didn’t land in this version, which means we’re another 3-5 years from anything that actually works like ZFS or btrfs which are LVM + RAID + filesystem.
According to the docs, you have to lay Stratis over MDRAID in EL8 to get storage redundancy:
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/htm...
Snapshots with Stratis appear to work more sanely than in LVM2, so that’s something, at least.
On 5/17/19 12:45 PM, Warren Young wrote:
On May 17, 2019, at 9:53 AM, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 17 May 2019, James Szinger wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 3:17 AM John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
RHEL advice would clearly be not to use btrfs.
I'm curious, is there anything in RHEL 8 that would replace BTRFS or ZFS? I'm experimenting with BTRFS on one system and the snapshot and subvolume features are nice.
I assume Stratis is the general answer.
It looks like built-in RAID didn’t land in this version, which means we’re another 3-5 years from anything that actually works like ZFS or btrfs which are LVM + RAID + filesystem.
According to the docs, you have to lay Stratis over MDRAID in EL8 to get storage redundancy:
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/html/managing_file_systems/managing-layered-local-storage-with-stratis_managing-file-systemsSnapshots with Stratis appear to work more sanely than in LVM2, so that’s something, at least. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I really want to upgrade to RHEL/Centos 8, but I need to keep using my btrfs disk/partitions. Btrfs is very useful to me. What can I do now ? I guess a kernel on Centos 8, that supports btrfs, will be very popular soon....
Warren Young wrote:
On May 17, 2019, at 9:53 AM, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 17 May 2019, James Szinger wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 3:17 AM John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
RHEL advice would clearly be not to use btrfs.
I'm curious, is there anything in RHEL 8 that would replace BTRFS or ZFS? I'm experimenting with BTRFS on one system and the snapshot and subvolume features are nice.
I assume Stratis is the general answer.
It looks like built-in RAID didn’t land in this version, which means we’re another 3-5 years from anything that actually works like ZFS or btrfs which are LVM + RAID + filesystem.
According to the docs, you have to lay Stratis over MDRAID in EL8 to get storage redundancy:
<snip> I followed the link, and was reading, and I'm confused. 1. How is this different than LVM? 2. Why would you want to put it on top of LVM?
mark "Please don't tell me 'because you can point and click'"
Am 17.05.2019 um 19:26 schrieb mark m.roth@5-cent.us:
Warren Young wrote:
On May 17, 2019, at 9:53 AM, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 17 May 2019, James Szinger wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 3:17 AM John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
RHEL advice would clearly be not to use btrfs.
I'm curious, is there anything in RHEL 8 that would replace BTRFS or ZFS? I'm experimenting with BTRFS on one system and the snapshot and subvolume features are nice.
I assume Stratis is the general answer.
It looks like built-in RAID didn’t land in this version, which means we’re another 3-5 years from anything that actually works like ZFS or btrfs which are LVM + RAID + filesystem.
According to the docs, you have to lay Stratis over MDRAID in EL8 to get storage redundancy:
<snip> I followed the link, and was reading, and I'm confused. 1. How is this different than LVM? 2. Why would you want to put it on top of LVM?
And more important - its a "Technology Preview" ...
-- LF
Reading the FAQ on Stratis, it appears to be a modified XFS file system that pools freespace, but also appears to be a long LONG ways from being something I'd do anything with other than poke at in a lab.
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 2:47 AM santhosh kumar santhosh.santuu@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 7:26 PM santhosh kumar santhosh.santuu@gmail.com wrote:
We migrated from redhat 5.3 to centos 7.5 and facing crashes in longevity tests
All of them point to below reason,
list_del corruption. next->prev should be ffff880c1e567000, but was 00450008a948adba
We searched around web and see this is fixed in redhat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028750
That's a Fedora bug and Fedora merely built a newer kernel with the upstream kernel fix. It's mostly irrelevant to RHEL and Centos.
But don't see any fix in Centos. https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=10944
According to the CentOS kernel changelog
$ rpm -q --changelog kernel-`uname -r`|less # only relevant lines shown * Mon Mar 03 2014 Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com [3.10.0-101.el7] - [fs] btrfs: take ordered root lock when removing ordered operations inode (Zach Brown) [1051282]
this might have been fixed in 2014, but I don't have access to 1051282. There are also scores more btrfs patches in the RHEL 7 kernel since 2013.
I also notice that the stack trace for https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=10944 does NOT mention btrfs, so it's most likely a different bug.
Jim
-
James Szinger -
John Hodrien -
John Pierce -
Julio E. Gonzalez -
Leon Fauster -
mark -
Pete Biggs -
santhosh kumar -
Warren Young