On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 03:25:04PM -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote: > On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 14:13 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 10:50:59AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > - this duplicates some functionality of the little-used fault > > > injection code; could we replace it entirely? > > > > I'd be really curious to hear from any users of that code, by the > > way. > > Anna, any ideas? > > I'm not sure who else has used it besides me, and it's been a while > since I have too. Do you remember which ones were most useful? They are: - forget_clients - forget_locks - forget_openowners - forget_delegations - recall_delegations We've got a functional replacement for forget_clients, but I haven't looked into the others yet. --b. > > > > > The idea was that it could be used to test client handling of > > exceptional conditions like recalled delegations and partially lost > > state. Is anyone regularly running such tests? > > > > I don't hate the code, and I'm not on a crusade to tear it all out > > Right > > Now, but it does create a few odd corner cases, so I'm wondering > > whether > > I could get away with replacing it eventually or whether that risks > > breaking someone's scripts. > > I'm cool with replacing it if there is a better way to do things. > > Anna > > > > > --b.
