[Lustre-discuss] [wc-discuss] System Deadlock

Roger Spellman Roger.Spellman at terascala.com
Thu Aug 18 06:50:09 PDT 2011

Thanks for you reply.  It was very helpful.  See my responses, below.

> > I am in the process of porting Lustre client 1.8.4 to a recent
> That is somewhat an unfortunate starting point, since 1.8.6 clients at
> least work with 2.6.32 kernels.

I understand.  I started this project before 1.8.6 came out, and I
wanted to stick with 1.8.4, in case any problems came up with 1.8.6.  As
soon as I am done with 1.8.4, I will port my patch to 1.8.6.  

> It's difficult to make any kind of assessment without knowing what
> you have made to the client.  It would be useful if you would submit a
> series of patches so that we can take a look at your patches.

My plan was to get it working, then post the patch to anyone who wanted
it.  That should be pretty soon.  I'm assuming that other people are
wanting to run Lustre with recent kernels.

> No, the Linux stack traces are terrible, they just print anything that
> looks like the address of a kernel or module function.  That includes
> function addresses that are passed as function parameters, such as
> callback functions.  It must have hit an interrupt at one point, but I
> think it is just random garbage on the stack.

Too bad.  I compiled the Kernel with Frame Pointers, so I hoped that the
kernel could unwind the stack properly.  

Now that I know to ignore the Stack Trace, I can instrument the code to
track down this problem. 


Roger Spellman
Staff Engineer
Terascala, Inc.
www.terascala.com <http://www.terascala.com/>

More information about the lustre-discuss mailing list