Thanks Christine.

One more question, in the broken environment, we found part of the source
code in libqb as below:
1)
void *
qb_rb_chunk_alloc(struct qb_ringbuffer_s * rb, size_t len)
{
        uint32_t write_pt;

        if (rb == NULL) {
                errno = EINVAL;
                return NULL;
        }
        /*
         * Reclaim data if we are over writing and we need space
         */
        if (rb->flags & QB_RB_FLAG_OVERWRITE) {
                while (qb_rb_space_free(rb) < (len + QB_RB_CHUNK_MARGIN)) {
                        *_rb_chunk_reclaim(rb);*
                }
        } else {
                if (qb_rb_space_free(rb) < (len + QB_RB_CHUNK_MARGIN)) {
                        errno = EAGAIN;
                        return NULL;
                }
        }

but in the master branch:
2)
                while (qb_rb_space_free(rb) < (len + QB_RB_CHUNK_MARGIN)) {
*                        int rc = _rb_chunk_reclaim(rb);*
*                        if (rc != 0) {*
*                                errno = rc;*
*                                return NULL;*
                        }
                }


is it possible that the code 1) we have been stucked in the infinite loop
of
while (qb_rb_space_free(rb) < (len + QB_RB_CHUNK_MARGIN)) {...} on the
condition that 'chunk_magic != QB_RB_CHUNK_MAGIC', function
_rb_chunk_reclaim() just return:
static void
_rb_chunk_reclaim(struct qb_ringbuffer_s * rb)
{
        uint32_t old_read_pt;
        uint32_t new_read_pt;
        uint32_t old_chunk_size;
        uint32_t chunk_magic;

        old_read_pt = rb->shared_hdr->read_pt;
        chunk_magic = QB_RB_CHUNK_MAGIC_GET(rb, old_read_pt);
   *     if (chunk_magic != QB_RB_CHUNK_MAGIC) {*
*                return;*
*        }*


and there is a commit seems fix it [1], do you know what's the background
of this commit? does it look to fix it?

Thanks again :)

[1]
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/libqb/commit/a8852fc481e3aa3fce53bb9e3db79d3e7cbed0c1



On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Christine Caulfield <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hiya,
>
> It's hard to be sure without more information, sadly - if the backtrace
> looks similar to the one you mention then upgrading libqb to 0.17 should
> help.
>
> Chrissie
>
> On 21/04/15 07:12, Hui Xiang wrote:
> > Thanks Christine, sorry for responding late.
> >
> > I got this problem again,  and corosync-blackbox just hang there, no
> > output. there are some other debug information for you guys.
> >
> > The backtrace and perf.data are very similar as link [1], but we don't
> > know what's the root cause, sure restart corosync is one of the
> > solution, but after a while it breaks again, so we'd like to find out
> > what's really going on there.
> >
> > Thanks for your efforts, very appreciated : )
> >
> > [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/corosync/msg03445.html
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Christine Caulfield <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 09/02/15 01:59, Hui Xiang wrote:
> >     > Hi guys,
> >     >
> >     >   I am having an issue with corosync where it consumes 100% cpu
> and hung on
> >     > the command corosync-quorumtool -l, Recv-Q is very high in the
> meantime
> >     > inside lxc container.
> >     >  corosync version : 2.3.3
> >     >
> >     >  transport : unicast
> >     >
> >     >  After setting up 3 keystone nodes with corosync/pacemaker, split
> brain
> >     > happened, on one of the keystone nodes we found the cpu is 100%
> used by
> >     > corosync.
> >     >
> >
> >
> >     It looks like it might be a problem I saw while doing some
> development
> >     on corosync, if it gets a SEGV, there's a signal handler that
> catches it
> >     and relays it back to libqb via a pipe, causing another SEGV and
> >     corosync is then just spinning on the pipe for ever. The cause I saw
> is
> >     not likely yo be the same as yours (it was my coding at the time ;-)
> but
> >     it does sound like a similar effect. The only way round it is to kill
> >     corosync and restart it. There might be something in the
> >     corosync-blackbox to indicate what went wrong if that has been
> saved. If
> >     you have that then please post it here so we can have a look.
> >
> >     man corosync-blackbox
> >
> >     Chrissie
> >
> >     > **
> >     >
> >     > asks: 42 total, 2 running, 40 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> >     > %Cpu(s):100.0 us, 0.0 sy, 0.0 ni, 0.0 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si,
> >     0.0 st
> >     > KiB Mem: 1017896 total, 932296 used, 85600 free, 19148 buffers
> >     > KiB Swap: 1770492 total, 5572 used, 1764920 free. 409312 cached Mem
> >     >
> >     >   PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> >     > 18637 root 20 0 704252 199272 34016 R 99.9 19.6 44:40.43 corosync
> >     >
> >     > From netstat output, one interesting finding is the Recv-Q size
> >     has a value
> >     > 320256, which is higher than normal.
> >     > And after simply doing pkill -9 corosync and restart
> >     corosync/pacemaker,
> >     > the whole cluster are back normal.
> >     >
> >     > Active Internet connections (only servers)
> >     > Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State
> >     PID/Program name
> >     > udp 320256 0 192.168.100.67:5434 <http://192.168.100.67:5434>
> >     0.0.0.0:* 18637/corosync
> >     >
> >     > Udp:
> >     >     539832 packets received
> >     >     619 packets to unknown port received.
> >     >     407249 packet receive errors
> >     >     1007262 packets sent
> >     >     RcvbufErrors: 69940
> >     >
> >     > **
> >     >
> >     >   So I am asking if there is any bug/issue related with corosync
> >     may cause
> >     > it slowly receive packets from socket and hung up due to some
> reason?
> >     >
> >     >   Thanks a lot, looking forward for your response.
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > Best Regards.
> >     >
> >     > Hui.
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > _______________________________________________
> >     > discuss mailing list
> >     > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >     > http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >     >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     discuss mailing list
> >     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >     http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to