Launchpad has imported 23 comments from the remote bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429755.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-01-22T21:31:23+00:00 Thom wrote: >From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11 Description of problem: CommuniGate Systems is reporting this case on behalf of two CommuniGate/RedHat customers running RedHat Enterprise Server 5.1 and seeing some problems related to file integrity on this platform. We have two customers who upgraded their CommuniGate Pro cluster nodes to RedHat 5.1, from an earlier RHES 4.1 version. In both these cases, the kernel reportedly in use is this: 2.6.18-53.el5 We also have reports of a possibly identical problem with a customer running this kernel version, though we don't have the specifics of the Linux OS version: kernel version 2.6.18-8.1.8 In both of these cases, the customers began to get what appear to be "null bytes" in mailboxes. I will a screenshot png of one of these mailboxes, as seen with vi. The mount options used are: tcp,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,hard,intr,timeo=600,bg,retrans=2,noatime The output of "mount -v" for one of these customers showed the following: >>>172.30.35.5:/vol/CGPweb on /CGPweb type nfs >>>(rw,nfsvers=3,proto=tcp,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,timeo=600,hard,intr,bg,acregmax=6,addr=172.30.35.5) The exact operating system in use was: >>>Linux MSA 2.6.18-53.el5 #1 SMP Wed Oct 10 16:34:02 EDT 2007 i686 i686 i386 >>>GNU/Linux Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5. When I last researched this in detail, it appeared that the byte offsets and total sizes were still correct after the null bytes were inserted; only the contents of those bytes were replaced with null characters. So, it appeared at first glance that it was a 1:1 replacement of valid data with "corruption"-type data of some sort. When analyzing CommuniGate Pro logs (which report the file sizes and offsets of all messages), we found two types of symptoms: 1. a missing message with null bytes inserted instead (1:1 replacement of characters bytes into NULL bytes) 2. no missing message, but null bytes between/within two messages, and there is some indication that parts of some messages are missing (and replaced with NULL bytes) A key question that is not 100% clearly answered is whether there is any indication of additional bytes ever being added, or if the null bytes are simply byte-replacement of data. From the available evidence, it appears that there is just 1:1 byte replacement. Also, shile this is not 100% confirmed - CommuniGate Pro appears to be getting the correct byte offsets from the file system, as noted in the "math" parts of this document. This would suggest a problem that is different than the previous pre-2.6.13 Linux NFS kernel problem. Also, the time interval between some of the events that insert null bytes is rather large, often times 10+ minutes of interval between events. Of these two customers, both went back to RedHat 4.5, and the problem immediately disappeared. We have many customers running RedHat ES 4.5 successfully. Earlier RedHat versions than this still have a different NFS kernel bug which can cause serious problems in an CommuniGate Pro Dynamic Cluster when NFS-based. (A few years ago, we discovered a Linux kernel bug related to NFS client handling in the kernel (specifically related to filesize caching), which was fixed by Trond Myklebust at NetApp, and these fixes were put into the 2.6.13 and 2.6.14 kernel. If interested, you can read more about this requirement here:) https://support.communigate.com/tickets/kb_article.php?ref=2908-TIOL-4737 Duplicating this problem will be challenging, though we believe possible using a Dynamic Cluster on RedHat 5 under relatively high load. We would be glad to work with RedHat to try to replicate the issue. Since our customers have since rolled back to RedHat 4.5, we don't have any customers actively using RedHat 5 within an NFS-based cluster, to our knowledge. If we could get access to RHES 5 with the latest patches, we would also be glad to begin trying to replicate this problem in-house. We would need two RedHat 5 servers running with an NFS-based storage backend - we have the equipment available, but would need to get the latest RedHat 5 software. We realize that reporting this bug with only partial evidence is difficult. However, we felt it would be better to report the possible bug and discover if there were possibly known causes, or if other RedHat customers are experiencing anything similar. We are not aware of any other CommuniGate customers running Linux-based NFS-based Dynamic Clusters having this problem, including quite a few who run more recent kernels. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): kernel-2.6.18-53.el5 How reproducible: Didn't try Steps to Reproduce: The basic file access flow used here would be 1. Have two or more NFS clients mount the same logical volume. 2. Have one NFS client modify a non-binary, text file, using C++ operations such as lseek(), write(), and fsync() (all filehandles are properly fsync()'d when closed by an NFS client) 3. No less than 6 seconds later, have a second NFS client open the same file, modify it (lseek/write/fsync). 4. Repeat steps 2-3 repeatedly. At some point in this file access pattern, null bytes may be inserted into these files. Actual Results: We will attempt to do so, though we would like to request temporary access to the latest appropriate versions of RedHat Enterprise 5 in order to test. Expected Results: Files should be written without null bytes inserted. Additional info: Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-01-22T21:45:57+00:00 Thom wrote: Created attachment 292558 vi session screenshot of mailbox showing null bytes in message file Please note that the screenshot has been modified to obfuscate potentially proprietary data. These fields are clearly designated with red boxes. This screenshot is quite representative of the problem, demonstrating how entire or partial sections of messages are replaced with null bytes, in what appear to be 1:1 byte replacements. The following message is properly delineated in the message "mbox" file with a new special From line: >From <... Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-01-22T23:24:05+00:00 Wendy wrote: Few questions: 1. How did these corrupted files look like from server end ? 2. As stated in the problem statement, "RHEL 4.5" doesn't have this issue but it is not clear when the platform was moved back to RHEL 4.5, was the server moved too ? What are the OSs running on server with and without the problem ? What is server's filesystem (GFS, ext3, etc) ? Intuitively, if file size and offset are correct but file contens were partially filled with "NULL" characters, it normally implies the file spaces are allocated but file contents are not there. We need to isolate whether this is really a NFS client issue as stated or it is a server (nfsd and/or filesystem) issue. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-01-22T23:34:10+00:00 Thom wrote: The NAS servers reportedly in use here are the following: 1. Customer A: NetApp 3020c running OnTAP v7.2.2 2. Customer B: NetApp 3020c So, both are using NetApp. We have contacts at NetApp if they should be brought into the discussion. However, one note that may or may not be in the case so far, but should be, is that the "null bytes" problem disappeared when Customer A went to a single NFS client (taking one CommuniGate Pro "Backend Server" offline). It is only with two or more NFS clients (Backend Servers) online that the problem can occur. NetApp uses a proprietary filesystem called "WAFS". I am unsure whether NetApp can provide filesystem/shell-level access to WAFS directly from their NAS device, but it may be possible. If we can attempt to reproduce these tests in-house, we do have a NetApp device on which to try this; although the model number and NetApp OS version may differ, and would need to be researched. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-01-23T14:53:47+00:00 Wendy wrote: ok, thanks ! Was wondering whether GFS clusters were involved. With above info, I would say this does look like an NFS client issue at this moment. Info will be passed to Red Hat NFS kernel folks. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-01-23T22:58:58+00:00 Tom wrote: Thanks for the detailed BZ. > Duplicating this problem will be challenging, though we believe possible ... I am making arrangements to make RHEL 5.1 available to you. If you can reproduce the problem that will be the first step. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-01T14:45:58+00:00 Jeff wrote: Yes, thanks for the detailed bug report. I've looked over this and have a question: 2. Have one NFS client modify a non-binary, text file, using C++ operations such as lseek(), write(), and fsync() (all filehandles are properly fsync()'d when closed by an NFS client) 3. No less than 6 seconds later, have a second NFS client open the same file, modify it (lseek/write/fsync). is there any sort of fcntl locking going on here? You don't mention any so I assume not... Would it be possible for you to write a small a reproducer program and give us a set of steps to duplicate this? Trying to troubleshoot this in the context of a MTA is going to be tricky. It'll be much easier if we can reduce the reproducer down. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-01T16:01:24+00:00 Thom wrote: Ideally we would, yes, write such a program. We do not have one currently for this particular problem. For the previous NFS-related "file-caching" bug (fixed in the 2.6.13/2.6.14 kernels by Trond Mykelbust), we did produce such a tool. However, that tool does not appear to trigger this new problem. I hope to be trying to reproduce this issue next week. If we can do so reliably, we can write such an application. Sincerely, -t Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-05T12:35:10+00:00 Jeff wrote: Excellent. I'll set this to NEEDINFO for now. Go ahead and set it back to ASSIGNED once you have more info to go on. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-08T01:24:06+00:00 Trond wrote: Created attachment 294295 Trivial testcase that should demonstrate the problem Instructions for the trivial testcase script: Please edit the variables 'filename' and 'remote' depending on your test environment. The testcase should be run on NFS client number 1. '$remote' is another NFS client that shares the same NFS namespace (and has access to the file ${filename}) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-08T01:25:29+00:00 Trond wrote: Created attachment 294296 NFS: Fix a potential file corruption issue when writing Proposed fix for the bug. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-08T11:26:34+00:00 Jeff wrote: Thanks, Trond. Let me see what we can do about getting this in soon. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-08T11:51:22+00:00 Jeff wrote: Yep, the reproducer here is indeed trivial and consistently fails. The patch seems to fix it and looks sane. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-08T20:28:51+00:00 RHEL wrote: This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/13 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-08T20:30:43+00:00 Jeff wrote: I've got some test kernels on my people page with this patch. Thom, would you be able to test your product on them and let me know if they correct the issue? Note that these kernels are based on develoment builds and aren't fully QA'ed, so please only deploy them for testing purposes... http://people.redhat.com/jlayton Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/14 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-13T16:52:27+00:00 Thom wrote: Excellent work all around, thank you folks. Thank you, Trond. I hope to test with the new kernel today. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/15 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-13T20:28:50+00:00 Jeff wrote: Excellent. I've just posted a new set of test kernels on my people page (jtltest.20). I'd recommend using those instead of any earlier ones since those kernels should also have the fixes for the vmsplice() local exploit that was disclosed recently. Let me know how it goes. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-13T20:51:49+00:00 Don wrote: in 2.6.18-81.el5 You can download this test kernel from http://people.redhat.com/dzickus/el5 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/17 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-15T16:34:55+00:00 Thom wrote: I have confirmed that the new kernel 2.6.18-81.el5 looks to have eliminated the null bytes problem, when using the testcase that Trond provided. I am also running a "SPECmail" test on this environment today, with the new kernel in place, in order to verify proper behaviour under higher load. Thanks, sincerely, -t Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/18 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-16T00:20:15+00:00 Thom wrote: More supporting detail - I ran two SPECmail tests this afternoon. Each test used 2 Linux NFS client servers, attached to a shared NFS storage volume. The kernels used were as follows, along with the results: Test tool: SPECmail (spec.org) v1.01 Server application: CommuniGate Pro 5.2.0 x86-64, 0+2 Dynamic Cluster NFS server: NetApp FAS270 OS: RedHat 5.1 x86_64 [RHEL5.1-Server-20071017.0-x86_64-DVD.iso] Test 1: Kernel vmlinuz-2.6.18-53.el5 Resulted in null byte in CommuniGate Pro "mailbox" files (I will attach a sample mailbox file demonstrating the null bytes.) Test 2: Kernel vmlinuz-2.6.18-81.el5 Resulted in no null bytes in mailboxes Thank you, please let me know if there are any questions. Sincerely. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-16T00:22:57+00:00 Thom wrote: Created attachment 295054 INBOX mailbox with 1 message replaced with null bytes Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-02-28T23:13:43+00:00 Mike wrote: Verified based on customer's report as well as the testcase. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2008-05-21T15:07:14+00:00 errata-xmlrpc wrote: An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on the solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0314.html Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/comments/28 ** Changed in: linux (Fedora) Importance: Unknown => High -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/199037 Title: Null bytes in files access by 2 or more NFS clients Status in linux package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in linux package in Fedora: Fix Released Bug description: There's a bug in the linux NFS client where it's possible to corrupt files when the server is a NetApp filer and two (or more) clients have write access to the file. A good example of such a file is ~/.zhistory. This has been fixed upstream and on RHEL5: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/7/642 (second changeset) and discussed here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429755 Please apply to the Hardy kernel, and possibly others, thanks! To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/199037/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages Post to : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
