On 04/09/2016 12:17 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
-Atin
Sent from one plus one
On 09-Apr-2016 9:32 am, "Rajesh Joseph" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 2:05 AM, Jeff Darcy <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Upon further investigation, I've been able to determine that the problem
>> lies in this line of our generic cleanup routine.
>>
>> type cleanup_lvm &>/dev/null && cleanup_lvm || true;
>>
>> This works great if snapshot.rc we're at the end of a test that included
>> snapshot.rc (which defines cleanup_lvm), but we've generally been moving
>> away from that in favor of calling it only at the beginning. Thus, when
>> we go from a snapshot test to a non-snapshot test, the cleanup at the
>> beginning of the latter does *not* clean up any LVM stuff that's left
>> over. What might have been a simple and correctly attributed failure in
>> the snapshot test can instead show up later. In this case, the sequence
>> of events is as follows:
>>
>> 1) bug-1322772 (snapshot) test starts glusterd
>>
>> 2) bug-1322772 exits while the new glusterd is still initializing
>>
>> 3) run-tests.sh looks for new core files and finds none
>>
>> 4) run-tests.sh starts bug-1002207 (stripe) test
>>
>> 5) glusterd from bug-1322772 dumps core
>>
>> 6) bug-1002207 test completes
>>
>> 7) run-tests.sh sees new core and misattributes it to bug-1002207
>>
>> The question is what to do about this. Unconditionally calling
>> lvm_cleanup from generic cleanup is simple, but might make regression
>> tests noticeably slower. Another possibility would be to change all
>> snapshot tests to call cleanup (or at least cleanup_lvm) at the end, or
>> use bash's "trap" mechanism to ensure the same. I'm not wild about any
>> of those, but lean toward the "trap" approach. Anyone else have any
>> opinions?
>
>
> I think each snapshot test script should call cleanup_lvm and trap is a
> great suggestion.
>
> atinm: Can you please look into the crash in the following test case?
> bugs/snapshot/bug-1322772-real-path-fix-for-snapshot.t
Do we have the link to the crash?
OT - Possibly unrelated glusterd crash in mainline [1]. This needs some
attention too.
-Vijay
[1] http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-April/000619.html
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
