On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 02:54:15PM -0400, Jim Rees wrote: > xfstests does require a small patch to work with NFSv4, which I can supply > if anyone is interested. Please send it to xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx with a proper description and signoff. > PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 rhcl1 3.0.0-blk > > 001 - output mismatch (see 001.out.bad) > -iter 5 chain ... check .................................... > +001 not run: this test requires a valid host fs for $SCRATCH_DEV > cleanup > 002 [not run] this test requires a valid host fs for $SCRATCH_DEV > 003 [not run] not suitable for this filesystem type: nfs > 004 [not run] not suitable for this filesystem type: nfs > 005 [not run] this test requires a valid host fs for $SCRATCH_DEV > 006 [not run] this test requires a valid host fs for $SCRATCH_DEV > 007 [not run] this test requires a valid host fs for $SCRATCH_DEV It seems like you didn't set up the SCRATCH_DEV variable properly. > Message from syslogd@rhcl1 at Jul 29 14:42:05 ... > kernel:------------[ cut here ]------------ > > Message from syslogd@rhcl1 at Jul 29 14:42:05 ... > kernel:invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP > > Message from syslogd@rhcl1 at Jul 29 14:42:05 ... > kernel:Stack: > > Message from syslogd@rhcl1 at Jul 29 14:42:05 ... > kernel:Call Trace: > > Message from syslogd@rhcl1 at Jul 29 14:42:05 ... Looks like we did find a bug in NFS. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
