-
Fan Yong authored
It is possible that during the LFSCK scanning, some server, MDT or OST, maybe offline. At that time, if the LFSCK needs to talk with such offline server, related RPC will trigger reconnect to the offline server, and the LFSCK engine has to wait untill the offline server become online or someone deactives the server by force. To avoid being blocked when lfsck_stop() under such case, the stop logic will send SIGINT signal to LFSCK engines. But we only do that for the LFSCK assistant engines, forget to do that for the LFSCK master engine. This patch fixes that. Signed-off-by:
Fan Yong <fan.yong@intel.com> Change-Id: I5d51ab49524e8ae54f0853e93b94e78913f65e8a Reviewed-on: https://review.whamcloud.com/31627 Tested-by: Jenkins Tested-by:
Maloo <hpdd-maloo@intel.com> Reviewed-by:
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com> Reviewed-by:
Lai Siyao <lai.siyao@intel.com> Reviewed-by:
Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>
Fan Yong authoredIt is possible that during the LFSCK scanning, some server, MDT or OST, maybe offline. At that time, if the LFSCK needs to talk with such offline server, related RPC will trigger reconnect to the offline server, and the LFSCK engine has to wait untill the offline server become online or someone deactives the server by force. To avoid being blocked when lfsck_stop() under such case, the stop logic will send SIGINT signal to LFSCK engines. But we only do that for the LFSCK assistant engines, forget to do that for the LFSCK master engine. This patch fixes that. Signed-off-by:
Fan Yong <fan.yong@intel.com> Change-Id: I5d51ab49524e8ae54f0853e93b94e78913f65e8a Reviewed-on: https://review.whamcloud.com/31627 Tested-by: Jenkins Tested-by:
Maloo <hpdd-maloo@intel.com> Reviewed-by:
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com> Reviewed-by:
Lai Siyao <lai.siyao@intel.com> Reviewed-by:
Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>