[PVFS-developers] Re: [PVFS2-developers] does anyone know what this is? (fwd)

[Phil Carns]

"bt" stands for back trace.  If you have back tracing enabled, then any 
gossip_lerr() call not only prints the line number the message occurred 
on, but also the stack trace.  The numbers off to the right are 
addresses that you can convert to code locations with the "addr2line" 
utility.

The patch that I mentioned in response to Brad's email earlier happens 
to also convert this gossip_lerr() call to a gossip_err() call; I don't 
think that network/socket failures should result in a backtrace and line 
number print- its pretty confusing as you have discovered :)

As far as why it is failing in the first place, I don't have any clue at 
the moment...

-Phil

Walter B. Ligon III wrote:
> I've built the latest CVS build - none of my changes, installed it and
> run pvfs2-ping, and I get this:
> 
> [walt at sidious pvfs]> bin/pvfs2-ping -m /mnt/pvfs2
>  
> (1) Parsing tab file...
>  
> (2) Initializing system interface...
>  
> (3) Initializing each file system found in tab file: /etc/pvfs2tab...
>  
> [16:02:45.639438] src/io/bmi/bmi_tcp/bmi-tcp.c line 1676: Error: 
> BMI_sockio_connect_sock: Success
> [16:02:45.639742]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping [0x8086d91]
> [16:02:45.639763]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping [0x8088923]
> [16:02:45.639772]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(BMI_tcp_post_sendunexpected_list+0x
> a6) [0x808664e]
> [16:02:45.639781]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(BMI_post_sendunexpected_list+0x166)
>  [0x8073a2a]
> [16:02:45.639790]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(job_bmi_send_list+0x21b) 
> [0x8078f07][16:02:45.639800]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping [0x807041f]
> [16:02:45.639864]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(vfprintf+0x3c9f) [0x8053973]
> [16:02:45.639875]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(PINT_client_state_machine_post+0x1c
> d) [0x8052bb9]
> [16:02:45.639886]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(PINT_server_get_config+0x12f) 
> [0x8063ad7]
> [16:02:45.639896]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(PVFS_sys_fs_add+0xc6) [0x8053e02]
> [16:02:45.639904]       [bt] bin/pvfs2-ping(main+0xdd) [0x805025d]
> Broken pipe
> [walt at sidious pvfs]>
> 
> Very similar error messages, only this time they have some function names
> imbedded.  I've never seen this kind of message out of PVFS before, does
> no one recognize these "bt" messages?
> 
> Walt
> 
> 
>>I have a branch of the code I was working on at ANL, installed it down here
>>and it is doing very different things.  In particular the client spit out
>>this error which I'm having a hard time understanding:
>>
>>[walt at sidious pvfs]> bin/create.set.get.eattr /foo key1 value1
>>[15:04:42.072103] src/io/bmi/bmi_tcp/bmi-tcp.c line 1676: Error: 
>>BMI_sockio_connect_sock: Success
>>[15:04:42.072264]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x8081a99]
>>[15:04:42.072278]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x808362b]
>>[15:04:42.072291]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x8081356]
>>[15:04:42.072304]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x806d53a]
>>[15:04:42.072316]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x80729b3]
>>[15:04:42.072329]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x806a733]
>>[15:04:42.072341]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr(vfprintf+0x366f) 
>>[0x804cc5b]
>>[15:04:42.072377]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr(vfprintf+0x289d) 
>>[0x804be89]
>>[15:04:42.072389]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x805ddeb]
>>[15:04:42.072402]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x807c7aa]
>>[15:04:42.072414]       [bt] bin/create.set.get.eattr [0x8068166]
>>Broken pipe
>>[walt at sidious pvfs]> 
>>
>>As you see it threw and error in BMI.  Ran that down and found where
>>the BMI function that connects the socket returned <0 but the strerror
>>translation is "Success" which doesn't make much sense to me.
>>
>>Then all of these lines starting [bt] followed by the command line
>>string of the client program, and and unknown hex value.  I have no idea
>>where that is comming from.
>>
>>Have I misconfigured something?  I thought I configured just like I did
>>the last time on this RedHat EL box.  Anyone recognize this?  It may have
>>something to do with my code, but my code should not have come into play
>>yet, unless I did something terribly wrong.
>>
>>Walt
>>