* xfstest generic/299 @ 2015-01-23 5:23 Steve French 2015-01-23 5:35 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Steve French @ 2015-01-23 5:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: fstests, linux-nfs Noticed test generic/299 failing over NFS (v4.1 dialect) with the error "[not run] /usr/bin/fio too old" fio-2.1.11 version (which is what is installed on current Ubuntu) is presumably not too old and the earlier test bug noticed in testing ext4 where NUM_JOBS was not defined in this testcase does not seem to be the issue (it fails the same way even if I set NUM_JOBS=4 manually in tests/generic/299) Should test 299 work over NFS? -- Thanks, Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/299 2015-01-23 5:23 xfstest generic/299 Steve French @ 2015-01-23 5:35 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-01-23 20:09 ` Steve French 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2015-01-23 5:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve French, fstests, linux-nfs On 1/22/15 11:23 PM, Steve French wrote: > Noticed test generic/299 failing over NFS (v4.1 dialect) with the error > > "[not run] /usr/bin/fio too old" > > fio-2.1.11 version (which is what is installed on current Ubuntu) is > presumably not too old Well, 2.1.11 was released 16-Jul-2014 fio is up to 2.2.5 now, so it sure could be. The test sets up a config file, and tries to run fio against it; if it fails, it's deemed "too old" And _require_fio dumps to $seqres.full, $FIO_PROG --warnings-fatal --showcmd $job >> $seqres.full 2>&1 [ $? -eq 0 ] || _notrun "$FIO_PROG too old, see $seqres.full" so what does 299.full look like? -Eric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/299 2015-01-23 5:35 ` Eric Sandeen @ 2015-01-23 20:09 ` Steve French 2015-01-23 20:17 ` Steve French 2015-01-23 20:25 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Steve French @ 2015-01-23 20:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: fstests, linux-nfs On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: > On 1/22/15 11:23 PM, Steve French wrote: >> Noticed test generic/299 failing over NFS (v4.1 dialect) with the error >> >> "[not run] /usr/bin/fio too old" >> >> fio-2.1.11 version (which is what is installed on current Ubuntu) is >> presumably not too old > > Well, 2.1.11 was released 16-Jul-2014 > > fio is up to 2.2.5 now, so it sure could be. I updated to 2.2.5-3 (cloning and building from the repository on git.kernel.org) which did not seem to change the results. > The test sets up a config file, and tries to run fio against it; > if it fails, it's deemed "too old" > > And _require_fio dumps to $seqres.full, > > $FIO_PROG --warnings-fatal --showcmd $job >> $seqres.full 2>&1 > [ $? -eq 0 ] || _notrun "$FIO_PROG too old, see $seqres.full" > > so what does 299.full look like? min value out of range: 0 (1 min) fio: failed parsing filesize=0 fio: job global dropped fio --ioengine=libaio --bs=128k --directory=/mnt1/scratch --size=999G --iodepth=128*1 --continue_on_error=write --ignore_error=,ENOSPC --error_dump=0 --create_on_open=1 --fallocate=none --exitall=1 -- Thanks, Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/299 2015-01-23 20:09 ` Steve French @ 2015-01-23 20:17 ` Steve French 2015-01-23 20:28 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-01-23 20:25 ` Eric Sandeen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Steve French @ 2015-01-23 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: fstests, linux-nfs On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: >> On 1/22/15 11:23 PM, Steve French wrote: >>> Noticed test generic/299 failing over NFS (v4.1 dialect) with the error >>> >>> "[not run] /usr/bin/fio too old" >>> >>> fio-2.1.11 version (which is what is installed on current Ubuntu) is >>> presumably not too old >> >> Well, 2.1.11 was released 16-Jul-2014 >> >> fio is up to 2.2.5 now, so it sure could be. > > I updated to 2.2.5-3 (cloning and building from the repository on > git.kernel.org) which did not seem to change the results. > >> The test sets up a config file, and tries to run fio against it; >> if it fails, it's deemed "too old" >> >> And _require_fio dumps to $seqres.full, >> >> $FIO_PROG --warnings-fatal --showcmd $job >> $seqres.full 2>&1 >> [ $? -eq 0 ] || _notrun "$FIO_PROG too old, see $seqres.full" >> >> so what does 299.full look like? > > min value out of range: 0 (1 min) > fio: failed parsing filesize=0 > fio: job global dropped > fio --ioengine=libaio --bs=128k --directory=/mnt1/scratch --size=999G > --iodepth=128*1 --continue_on_error=write --ignore_error=,ENOSPC > --error_dump=0 --create_on_open=1 --fallocate=none --exitall=1 > Manually setting FILE_SIZE=262144 in tests/generic/299 got it past that point (I wonder if BLOCK_SIZE is not set - where does it get set?). But since it then call xfs_io falloc it is not going to work over NFSv4.1 -- Thanks, Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/299 2015-01-23 20:17 ` Steve French @ 2015-01-23 20:28 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2015-01-23 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve French; +Cc: fstests, linux-nfs On 1/23/15 2:17 PM, Steve French wrote: > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: >>> On 1/22/15 11:23 PM, Steve French wrote: >>>> Noticed test generic/299 failing over NFS (v4.1 dialect) with the error >>>> >>>> "[not run] /usr/bin/fio too old" >>>> >>>> fio-2.1.11 version (which is what is installed on current Ubuntu) is >>>> presumably not too old >>> >>> Well, 2.1.11 was released 16-Jul-2014 >>> >>> fio is up to 2.2.5 now, so it sure could be. >> >> I updated to 2.2.5-3 (cloning and building from the repository on >> git.kernel.org) which did not seem to change the results. >> >>> The test sets up a config file, and tries to run fio against it; >>> if it fails, it's deemed "too old" >>> >>> And _require_fio dumps to $seqres.full, >>> >>> $FIO_PROG --warnings-fatal --showcmd $job >> $seqres.full 2>&1 >>> [ $? -eq 0 ] || _notrun "$FIO_PROG too old, see $seqres.full" >>> >>> so what does 299.full look like? >> >> min value out of range: 0 (1 min) >> fio: failed parsing filesize=0 >> fio: job global dropped >> fio --ioengine=libaio --bs=128k --directory=/mnt1/scratch --size=999G >> --iodepth=128*1 --continue_on_error=write --ignore_error=,ENOSPC >> --error_dump=0 --create_on_open=1 --fallocate=none --exitall=1 >> > > Manually setting FILE_SIZE=262144 in tests/generic/299 got it > past that point (I wonder if BLOCK_SIZE is not set - where > does it get set?). > > But since it then call xfs_io falloc it is not going to work over NFSv4.1 ok, then it should have a requirement on falloc... which it does ... _require_fio $fio_config _require_xfs_io_command "falloc" so it'll gracefully _notrun due to either of those, as it should, apparently. I'd swap the two _requires, the falloc _notrun message will make more sense than the _require_fio notrun message, and save future NFS users the head-scratching you've suffered through. :) -Eric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/299 2015-01-23 20:09 ` Steve French 2015-01-23 20:17 ` Steve French @ 2015-01-23 20:25 ` Eric Sandeen 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2015-01-23 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve French; +Cc: fstests, linux-nfs On 1/23/15 2:09 PM, Steve French wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> wrote: >> On 1/22/15 11:23 PM, Steve French wrote: >>> Noticed test generic/299 failing over NFS (v4.1 dialect) with the error >>> >>> "[not run] /usr/bin/fio too old" >>> >>> fio-2.1.11 version (which is what is installed on current Ubuntu) is >>> presumably not too old >> >> Well, 2.1.11 was released 16-Jul-2014 >> >> fio is up to 2.2.5 now, so it sure could be. > > I updated to 2.2.5-3 (cloning and building from the repository on > git.kernel.org) which did not seem to change the results. > >> The test sets up a config file, and tries to run fio against it; >> if it fails, it's deemed "too old" >> >> And _require_fio dumps to $seqres.full, >> >> $FIO_PROG --warnings-fatal --showcmd $job >> $seqres.full 2>&1 >> [ $? -eq 0 ] || _notrun "$FIO_PROG too old, see $seqres.full" >> >> so what does 299.full look like? so it's telling you: > min value out of range: 0 (1 min) > fio: failed parsing filesize=0 ^^^^^^^^^^ and if we read the test: BLK_DEV_SIZE=`blockdev --getsz $SCRATCH_DEV` FILE_SIZE=$((BLK_DEV_SIZE * 512)) cat >$fio_config <<EOF ########### # $seq test fio activity # Filenames derived from jobsname and jobid like follows: # ${JOB_NAME}.${JOB_ID}.${ITERATION_ID} [global] ioengine=libaio bs=128k directory=${SCRATCH_MNT} filesize=${FILE_SIZE} ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ... since you have no block device for NFS, blockdev will fail, and you won't get a block dev size, so you won't get a file size, and the fio test won't work. The script not catching this looks like a bug. fio saying "too old" looks inaccurate. You could fix it to DTRT on NFS somehow, or catch the fact that the blockdev command fails (probably because $SCRATCH_DEV isn't set?) and _notrun the test. I imagine it could be fixed, though; df total space available on $SCRATCH_MNT might do as well as blockdev --getsz, though I'm not 100% sure. -Eric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-01-23 20:28 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-01-23 5:23 xfstest generic/299 Steve French 2015-01-23 5:35 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-01-23 20:09 ` Steve French 2015-01-23 20:17 ` Steve French 2015-01-23 20:28 ` Eric Sandeen 2015-01-23 20:25 ` Eric Sandeen
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.