On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Niels de Vos <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 01:15:04PM +0530, Raghavendra Talur wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Atin Mukherjee < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Sent from Samsung Galaxy S4 > > > On 13 Jun 2015 12:58, "Anand Nekkunti" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi All > > > > Rebalance is not working in single node cluster environment ( > current > > > test frame work ). I am getting error in below test , it seems > re-balance > > > is not migrated to current cluster test framework. > > > Could you pin point which test case fails and what log do you see? > > > > > > > > cleanup; > > > > TEST launch_cluster 2; > > > > TEST $CLI_1 peer probe $H2; > > > > > > > > EXPECT_WITHIN $PROBE_TIMEOUT 1 check_peers > > > > > > > > $CLI_1 volume create $V0 $H1:$B1/$V0 $H2:$B2/$V0 > > > > EXPECT 'Created' volinfo_field $V0 'Status'; > > > > > > > > $CLI_1 volume start $V0 > > > > EXPECT 'Started' volinfo_field $V0 'Status'; > > > > > > > > #Mount FUSE > > > > TEST glusterfs -s $H1 --volfile-id=$V0 $M0; > > > > > > > > TEST mkdir $M0/dir{1..4}; > > > > TEST touch $M0/dir{1..4}/files{1..4}; > > > > > > > > TEST $CLI_1 volume add-brick $V0 $H1:$B1/${V0}1 $H2:$B2/${V0}1 > > > > > > > > TEST $CLI_1 volume rebalance $V0 start > > > > > > > > EXPECT_WITHIN 60 "completed" CLI_1_rebalance_status_field $V0 > > > > > > > > $CLI_2 volume status $V0 > > > > EXPECT 'Started' volinfo_field $V0 'Status'; > > > > > > > > cleanup; > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > Anand.N > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > > > > > If it is a crash of glusterd when you do rebalance start, it is because > of > > FORTIFY_FAIL in libc. > > Here is the patch that Susant has already sent: > > http://review.gluster.org/#/c/11090/ > > > > You can verify that it is the same crash by checking the core in gdb; a > > SIGABRT would be raised > > after strncpy. > > Sounds like we should use _FORTIFY_SOURCE for running our regression > tests? Patches for build.sh or one of the other scripts are welcome! > > You can get them here: > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs-patch-acceptance-tests/ > > Thanks, > Niels > Yes, Kaushal and Vijay also agreed to have our regression use this flag. I have discovered a problem though. For glibc to detect these possible overflows, we need to have -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE at level 2 and -O optimization flag at minimum of 1 with 2 as recommended. Read this for more info: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-09/msg02055.html Not sure if having -O2 will lead to debugging other cores difficult. If nobody objects to O2, I think I have created a pull request correctly. Please merge. https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs-patch-acceptance-tests/pull/1 -- *Raghavendra Talur *
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
