Hi Sage, Write some unittest, but seems not right, see [0], give some comments please, I use `cout` to print the value, but I don't know where to see them. I got a lot of other "FAIL" in the wip-addr-more branch, like: ceph-detect-init/run-tox.sh ceph-disk/run-tox.sh test/run-rbd-unit-tests.sh I am wondering is this because my working environment? My laptop is really not very powerful, "i5-3210M CPU, 8G memory" :( make check is quite slow. [0] https://github.com/zhjwpku/ceph/commit/e15a240d56c2b67a8b0906dc80650a91bff1518f On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, Sage, > > Sorry I did not see your reply util now, I will work on it. > > Thanks! > Zhao > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 1:46 AM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Jun 2016, Sage Weil wrote: >>> Hi Zhao, >>> >>> On Tue, 31 May 2016, Junwang Zhao wrote: >>> > Hi Sage & Haomai, >>> > >>> > I try to run './vstart.sh -d -x -n' to test the patches today, I got >>> > some error like 'wrong node', after some work, I found the >>> > error was introduced by this patch[0]. I change the code to >>> > use the legacy decode and encode, but got stuck somewhere. >>> > >>> > --- a/src/msg/msg_types.h >>> > +++ b/src/msg/msg_types.h >>> > @@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ struct entity_addr_t { >>> > // broader study >>> > >>> > void encode(bufferlist& bl, uint64_t features) const { >>> > - if ((features & CEPH_FEATURE_MSG_ADDR2) == 0) { >>> > + if ((features & CEPH_FEATURE_MSG_ADDR2) != 0) { >>> > ::encode((__u32)0, bl); >>> > ::encode(nonce, bl); >>> > sockaddr_storage ss = get_sockaddr_storage(); >>> > >>> > >>> > Can you please see the patch again and give some comments? >>> > >>> > [0]https://github.com/zhjwpku/ceph/commit/8934f038fdf28156038770e601e4a27f7a684390 >>> >>> This was enough to make things work fo rme: >>> >>> diff --git a/src/msg/msg_types.h b/src/msg/msg_types.h >>> index 9c521e6..0da0614 100644 >>> --- a/src/msg/msg_types.h >>> +++ b/src/msg/msg_types.h >>> @@ -199,8 +199,7 @@ WRITE_CLASS_ENCODER(ceph_sockaddr_storage) >>> >>> struct entity_addr_t { >>> typedef enum { >>> - TYPE_NONE = 0, >>> - TYPE_LEGACY = 1, >>> + TYPE_LEGACY = 0, >>> } type_t; >>> >>> __u32 type; >>> @@ -211,7 +210,7 @@ struct entity_addr_t { >>> sockaddr_in6 sin6; >>> } u; >>> >>> - entity_addr_t() : type(0), nonce(0) { >>> + entity_addr_t() : type(TYPE_LEGACY), nonce(0) { >>> memset(&u, 0, sizeof(u)); >>> } >>> explicit entity_addr_t(const ceph_entity_addr &o) { >>> >>> but I think this is not the right fix. I think we still want >>> TYPE_NONE, TYPE_LEGACY, and (soon) TYPE_MSGR2, and that the core problem >>> is places that are creating addrs aren't setting the type properly. Going >>> to play with this a bit... >> >> I pushed a wip-addr-more branch: >> >> https://github.com/liewegas/ceph/commits/wip-addr-more >> >> This fixes the parser to take type prefixes, default to legacy, and >> changes entity_addr_t() so that it renders are "-" instead of ":/0" (which >> was weird anyway). >> >> I think what we need next are some unit tests in test/test_addrs.cc that >> do things like encode a entity_addr_t with no features, decode as >> entity_addrvec_t, or construct varous addrvecs, encode with no features, >> an ensure a decode to entity_addr_t gives back the right addr from the >> list. >> >> sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
