If master recovery happens on an rsb in one recovery sequence, then that
sequence is aborted before lock recovery happens, then in the next
sequence, we rely on the previous master recovery (which may now be
invalid due to another node ignoring a lookup result) and go on do to the
lock recovery where we get stuck due to an invalid master value.
recovery cycle begins: master of rsb X has left
nodes A and B send node C an rcom lookup for X to find the new master
C gets lookup from B first, sets B as new master, and sends reply back to B
C gets lookup from A next, and sends reply back to A saying B is master
A gets lookup reply from C and sets B as the new master in the rsb
recovery cycle on A, B and C is aborted to start a new recovery
B gets lookup reply from C and ignores it since there's a new recovery
recovery cycle begins: some other node has joined
B doesn't think it's the master of X so it doesn't rebuild it in the directory
C looks up the master of X, no one is master, so it becomes new master
B looks up the master of X, finds it's C
A believes that B is the master of X, so it sends its lock to B
B sends an error back to A
A resends
this repeats forever, the incorrect master value on A is never corrected
The fix is to do master recovery on an rsb that still has the NEW_MASTER
flag set from an earlier recovery sequence, and therefore didn't complete
lock recovery.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
Add a "ci_" prefix to the fields in the dlm_config_info struct so that we
can use macros to add configfs functions to access them (in a later
patch). No functional changes in this patch, just naming changes.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
Red Hat BZ 213684
If a node sends an lkb to the new master (RCOM_LOCK message) during
recovery and recovery is then aborted on both nodes before it gets a
reply, the res_recover_locks_count needs to be reset to 0 so that when the
subsequent recovery comes along and sends the lkb to the new master again
the assertion doesn't trigger that checks that counter is zero.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
When there are no locks on a resource, the recover_locks() function fails
to clear the NEW_MASTER flag by going directly to out, missing the line
that clears the flag.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
Introduce new function dlm_dump_rsb() to call within assertions instead of
dlm_print_rsb(). The new function dumps info about all locks on the rsb
in addition to rsb details.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
If a node becomes the new master of an rsb during recovery, the
LOCKS_PURGED flag needs to be set on it so that any waiting/converting
locks will try to be granted.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
This is the core of the distributed lock manager which is required
to use GFS2 as a cluster filesystem. It is also used by CLVM and
can be used as a standalone lock manager independantly of either
of these two projects.
It implements VAX-style locking modes.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
David Teigland