-Atin
Sent from one plus one
On 09-Apr-2016 9:57 am, "Vijay Bellur" <vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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.
Sure, will take a look.
>
> -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
