Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 17:32:15 +0000 From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> To: Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> Cc: Adam McDougall <mcdouga9@egr.msu.edu>, "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: nfs lockd errors after NetApp software upgrade. Message-ID: <YQBPR0101MB1427C9D4CF8918F10B6FD400DD2C0@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> In-Reply-To: <8A78F67B-C244-45CF-B9BF-D7062669B33B@cs.huji.ac.il> References: <EBC4AD74-EC62-4C67-AB93-1AA91F662AAC@cs.huji.ac.il> <YQBPR0101MB1427411AFE335E869B9CF022DD530@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <0121E289-D2AE-44BA-ADAC-4814CAEE676F@cs.huji.ac.il> <CAGfybS-3Rvs57=oGFEfii_9a=aWxPr6dEq1Y1LqHbLXK1ZKmXA@mail.gmail.com> <YQBPR0101MB1427F9BE658B9A46C7E08335DD520@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <854B6E5A-C6BC-44B3-A656-FC9B8EF19881@cs.huji.ac.il> <YQBPR0101MB1427F445F1F1EAF382E5131ADD520@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <8770BD0D-4B72-431A-B4F5-A29D4DBA03B1@cs.huji.ac.il> <b1182bbf-fd0b-a23d-1cc4-ddf9513bcb2e@egr.msu.edu> <YQBPR0101MB1427CE52BBA32A888443BFB4DD2D0@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>, <8A78F67B-C244-45CF-B9BF-D7062669B33B@cs.huji.ac.il>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel Braniss wrote:=0A=
>>On 20 Dec 2019, at 19:19, Rick Macklem >><rmacklem@uoguelph.ca<mailto:rma=
cklem@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:=0A=
>>=0A=
>>Adam McDougall wrote:=0A=
>>>Try changing bool_t do_tcp =3D FALSE; to TRUE in=0A=
>>>/usr/src/sys/nlm/nlm_prot_impl.c, recompile the kernel and try again. I=
=0A=
>>>think this makes it match Linux client behavior. I suspect I ran into=0A=
>>>the same issue as you. I do think I used nolockd is a workaround=0A=
>>>temporarily. I can provide some more details if it works.=0A=
>>If this fixes the problem, please let me know.=0A=
>>=0A=
>>I'm not sure I'd want to change the default, since it might break things =
for=0A=
>>others, but I can definitely make it a tunable, so that people don't need=
to=0A=
>>recompile a kernel to deal with it.=0A=
>>=0A=
>>=0A=
>great! I was just about to see how it can be done(tunable) but need to che=
ck if it can >be done=0A=
>at any time, or just at boot time.=0A=
I haven't looked at the code, but I suspect changing it on the fly could ca=
use problems,=0A=
so I am inclined to make it a tunable (boot time only).=0A=
=0A=
>thanks.=0A=
>btw, currently, from several hours of analysing the traffic, it seems that=
nlm is UDP.=0A=
I assume that means you haven't tried flipping it to TCP yet.=0A=
=0A=
Please let us know how it goes, rick=0A=
=0A=
danny=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
rick=0A=
=0A=
On 12/19/19 9:21 AM, Daniel Braniss wrote:=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
On 19 Dec 2019, at 16:09, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca<mailto:rmackle=
m@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:=0A=
=0A=
Daniel Braniss wrote:=0A=
[stuff snipped]=0A=
all mounts are nfsv3/tcp=0A=
This doesn't affect what the NLM code (rpc.lockd) uses. I honestly don't kn=
ow when=0A=
the NLM uses tcp vs udp. I think rpc.statd still uses IP broadcast at times=
.=0A=
can the replay cache have any influence here? I tend to remember way back i=
ssues=0A=
with it,=0A=
=0A=
To me, it looks like a network configuration issue.=0A=
that was/is my gut feelings too, but, as far as we can tell, nothing has ch=
anged in the network infrastructure,=0A=
the problems appeared after the NetAPP=92s software was updated, it was wor=
king fine till then.=0A=
=0A=
the problems are also happening on freebsd 12.1=0A=
=0A=
You could capture packets (maybe when a client first starts rpc.statd and r=
pc.lockd)=0A=
and then look at them in wireshark. I'd disable statup of rpc.lockd and rpc=
.statd=0A=
at boot for a test client and then run something like:=0A=
# tcpdump -s 0 -s out.pcap host <netapp-host>=0A=
- and then start rpc.statd and rpc.lockd=0A=
Then I'd look at out.pcap in wireshark (much better at decoding this stuff =
than=0A=
tcpdump). I'd look for things like different reply IP addresses from the Ne=
tapp,=0A=
which might confuse this tired old NLM protocol Sun devised in the mid-1980=
s.=0A=
=0A=
it=92s going to be an interesting week end :-(=0A=
=0A=
the error is also appearing on freebsd-11.2-stable, I=92m now checking if i=
t=92s also=0A=
happening on 12.1=0A=
btw, the NetApp version is 9.3P17=0A=
Yes. I wasn't the author of the NSM and NLM code (long ago I refused to eve=
n=0A=
try to implement it, because I knew the protocol was badly broken) and I av=
oid=0A=
fiddling with. As such, it won't have change much since around FreeBSD7.=0A=
and we haven=92t had any issues with it for years, so you must have done so=
mething good=0A=
=0A=
cheers,=0A=
danny=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
rick=0A=
=0A=
cheers,=0A=
danny=0A=
=0A=
rick=0A=
=0A=
Cheers=0A=
=0A=
Richard=0A=
(NetApp admin)=0A=
=0A=
On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 15:46, Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il<mailto:da=
nny@cs.huji.ac.il><mailto:danny@cs.huji.ac.il>> wrote:=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
On 18 Dec 2019, at 16:55, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca<mailto:rmackle=
m@uoguelph.ca><mailto:rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:=0A=
=0A=
Daniel Braniss wrote:=0A=
=0A=
Hi,=0A=
The server with the problems is running FreeBSD 11.1 stable, it was working=
fine for >several months,=0A=
but after a software upgrade of our NetAPP server it=92s reporting many loc=
kd errors >and becomes catatonic,=0A=
...=0A=
Dec 18 13:11:02 moo-09 kernel: nfs server fr-06:/web/www: lockd not respond=
ing=0A=
Dec 18 13:11:45 moo-09 last message repeated 7 times=0A=
Dec 18 13:12:55 moo-09 last message repeated 8 times=0A=
Dec 18 13:13:10 moo-09 kernel: nfs server fr-06:/web/www: lockd is alive ag=
ain=0A=
Dec 18 13:13:10 moo-09 last message repeated 8 times=0A=
Dec 18 13:13:29 moo-09 kernel: sonewconn: pcb 0xfffff8004cc051d0: Listen qu=
eue >overflow: 194 already in queue awaiting acceptance (1 occurrences)=0A=
Dec 18 13:14:29 moo-09 kernel: sonewconn: pcb 0xfffff8004cc051d0: Listen qu=
eue >overflow: 193 already in queue awaiting acceptance (3957 occurrences)=
=0A=
Dec 18 13:15:29 moo-09 kernel: sonewconn: pcb 0xfffff8004cc051d0: Listen qu=
eue >overflow: 193 already in queue awaiting acceptance =85=0A=
Seems like their software upgrade didn't improve handling of NLM RPCs?=0A=
Appears to be handling RPCs slowly and/or intermittently. Note that no one=
=0A=
tests it with IPv6, so at least make sure you are still using IPv4 for the =
mounts and=0A=
try and make sure IP broadcast works between client and Netapp. I think the=
NLM=0A=
and NSM (rpc.statd) still use IP broadcast sometimes.=0A=
=0A=
we are ipv4 - we have our own class c :-)=0A=
Maybe the network guys can suggest more w.r.t. why, but as I've stated befo=
re,=0A=
the NLM is a fundamentally broken protocol which was never published by Sun=
,=0A=
so I suggest you avoid using it if at all possible.=0A=
well, at the moment the ball is on NetAPP court, and switching to NFSv4 at =
the moment is out of the question, it=92s=0A=
a production server used by several thousand students.=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
- If the locks don't need to be seen by other clients, you can just use the=
"nolockd"=0A=
mount option.=0A=
or=0A=
- If locks need to be seen by other clients, try NFSv4 mounts. Netapp filer=
s=0A=
should support NFSv4.1, which is a much better protocol that NFSv4.0.=0A=
=0A=
Good luck with it, rick=0A=
thanks=0A=
danny=0A=
=0A=
=85=0A=
any ideas?=0A=
=0A=
thanks,=0A=
danny=0A=
=0A=
_______________________________________________=0A=
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org><mailto:freebs=
d-stable@freebsd.org> mailing list=0A=
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable=0A=
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org<ma=
ilto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>"=0A=
=0A=
_______________________________________________=0A=
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org><mailto:freebs=
d-stable@freebsd.org> mailing list=0A=
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable=0A=
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org<ma=
ilto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>"=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
_______________________________________________=0A=
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> mailing list=
=0A=
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable=0A=
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"=
=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
_______________________________________________=0A=
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> mailing list=
=0A=
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable=0A=
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org<ma=
ilto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>"=0A=
_______________________________________________=0A=
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> mailing list=
=0A=
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable=0A=
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org<ma=
ilto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>"=0A=
=0A=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YQBPR0101MB1427C9D4CF8918F10B6FD400DD2C0>