FreeNAS 11.1 iSCSI panic with LUN used by two hosts simultaneously

Status
Not open for further replies.

bittenoff

Dabbler
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
20
During testing, we cloned a VMware VM that was using an iSCSI LUN to boot from. The first VM would start up fine but the second always hung during the boot. The reason was that FreeNAS had panic'd as below:
Code:
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 WARNING: 192.168.26.8 (iqn.1991-05.com.microsoft:apm-ds-1a): tasks terminated
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 cpuid = 7; apic id = 07
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 fault virtual address	= 0x220
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 fault code		= supervisor write data, page not present
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 instruction pointer	= 0x20:0xffffffff8066e866
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 stack pointer			= 0x28:0xfffffe023b4c77c0
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 frame pointer			= 0x28:0xfffffe023b4c7830
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 code segment		= base 0x0, limit 0xfffff, type 0x1b
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 WARNING: 192.168.26.5 (iqn.1991-05.com.microsoft:apm-ds-1a): session reinstatement from different address 192.168.26.8
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1			 = DPL 0, pres 1, long 1, def32 0, gran 1
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 processor eflags	= interrupt enabled, resume, IOPL = 0
Dec 14 15:58:19 freenas-1 current process		= 6119 (ctld)

Whilst this is a configuration error (the two hosts should have their own LUNs), FreeNAS shouldn't panic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

dlavigne

Guest
Is this on 11.1? If so, please create a report at bugs.freenas.org and post the issue number here.
 

Ericloewe

Server Wrangler
Moderator
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
20,194
Not that this should in any way cause FreeNAS to panic, but are you sure you want to access an iSCSI share from two client machines at the same time?
 

bittenoff

Dabbler
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
20
Not that this should in any way cause FreeNAS to panic, but are you sure you want to access an iSCSI share from two client machines at the same time?

No we don't want two VMs accessing the same LUN :) That was an error on the initiator side and we have corrected the problem by giving each VM its own LUN.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top