On 6/14/19 5:50 PM, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> On 6/14/19 3:03 PM, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 systemd[1]: Starting Corosync Cluster Engine...
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 corosync[2160]: [MAIN ] Corosync Cluster
>> Engine 3.0.1-dirty starting up
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 corosync[2160]: [MAIN ] Corosync built-in
>> features: dbus monitoring watchdog systemd xmlconf snmp pie relro bindnow
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 corosync[2160]: [MAIN ] parse error in
>> config: Not all nodes have the same number of links
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 corosync[2160]: [MAIN ] Corosync Cluster
>> Engine exiting with status 8 at main.c:1386.
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 systemd[1]: corosync.service: Main process
>> exited, code=exited, status=8/n/a
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 systemd[1]: corosync.service: Failed with
>> result 'exit-code'.
>> Jun 14 14:23:50 clustertest71 systemd[1]: Failed to start Corosync Cluster
>> Engine.
>>
>>[snip]
>> doing the same with link0 and link1 instead of link0 and link5 works.
>> subsequently changing corosync.conf to have link0 and linkX with X != 1
>> also works, although the reload complains with the same error message
>> (cmap and corosync-cfgtool show the updated status just fine).
>> restarting corosync fails, again with the status shown above.
>>
>> haven't checked yet whether that is an issue on our side or corosync,
>> but probably worth an investigation ;)
>
> this is a "bug" of corosync..
>
> the following check in exec/totemconfig fails:
>
> for (i=0; i<num_configured; i++) {
> if (totem_config->interfaces[i].member_count != members) err...
> }
>
> here, num_configured is the correct number of configured interfaces
> (2), the struct entry member_count is 1 (one node, which seems OK here
> too) but members is 0...
>
> members is set a bit above with:
> members = totem_config->interfaces[0].member_count;
>
>
> but totem_config->interfaces gets dynamically allocated with:
> totem_config->interfaces = malloc (sizeof (struct totem_interface) *
> INTERFACE_MAX);
>
> So it's not the configured interfaces (0 being the lowest one
> configured, 1 the next, ...) but the _actual_ links from 0 to
> INTERFACE_MAX - 1 (== 7)
>
> So here it _always_ gets the membercount from link0, if that is
> non-existent in the config then it's the default 0...
>
> So either, link0 isn't as optional as you meant/wished or they have
> at least one, and probably a few more, bugs where they falsely assume
> that interfaces[0] is the first configured not link0...
>
>
see: https://github.com/corosync/corosync/pull/484
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com
https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
