On 04/09/2016 12:17 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
-Atin Sent from one plus one On 09-Apr-2016 9:32 am, "Rajesh Joseph" <rjoseph@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:rjoseph@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 2:05 AM, Jeff Darcy <jdarcy@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jdarcy@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >> >> Upon further investigation, I've been able to determine that the problem >> lies in this line of our generic cleanup routine. >> >> type cleanup_lvm &>/dev/null && cleanup_lvm || true; >> >> This works great if snapshot.rc we're at the end of a test that included >> snapshot.rc (which defines cleanup_lvm), but we've generally been moving >> away from that in favor of calling it only at the beginning. Thus, when >> we go from a snapshot test to a non-snapshot test, the cleanup at the >> beginning of the latter does *not* clean up any LVM stuff that's left >> over. What might have been a simple and correctly attributed failure in >> the snapshot test can instead show up later. In this case, the sequence >> of events is as follows: >> >> 1) bug-1322772 (snapshot) test starts glusterd >> >> 2) bug-1322772 exits while the new glusterd is still initializing >> >> 3) run-tests.sh looks for new core files and finds none >> >> 4) run-tests.sh starts bug-1002207 (stripe) test >> >> 5) glusterd from bug-1322772 dumps core >> >> 6) bug-1002207 test completes >> >> 7) run-tests.sh sees new core and misattributes it to bug-1002207 >> >> The question is what to do about this. Unconditionally calling >> lvm_cleanup from generic cleanup is simple, but might make regression >> tests noticeably slower. Another possibility would be to change all >> snapshot tests to call cleanup (or at least cleanup_lvm) at the end, or >> use bash's "trap" mechanism to ensure the same. I'm not wild about any >> of those, but lean toward the "trap" approach. Anyone else have any >> opinions? > > > I think each snapshot test script should call cleanup_lvm and trap is a > great suggestion. > > atinm: Can you please look into the crash in the following test case? > bugs/snapshot/bug-1322772-real-path-fix-for-snapshot.t Do we have the link to the crash?
OT - Possibly unrelated glusterd crash in mainline [1]. This needs some attention too.
-Vijay [1] http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-April/000619.html _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
