Sent from Samsung Galaxy S4 On 13 Jun 2015 14:11, "Raghavendra Talur" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 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 I feel we should try to maintain uniformity at all the places as far as compilation flags are concerned. > > > -- > Raghavendra Talur >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
