On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 07:43:06PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
The zfs tests are failing when run as an unprivileged user in
thread_create() ... because default limit for threads (160) is too
low ! When run as root, the limit value (2500) seems to be high enough.
So should we
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 05:25:00AM +, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
Module Name: src
Committed By: jmmv
Date: Sat Mar 16 05:25:00 UTC 2013
Modified Files:
src/tests/fs/common: h_fsmacros.h
Log Message:
Mark the zfs tests as requiring root.
This is wrong. The zfs
Nicolas Joly nj...@pasteur.fr writes:
The zfs tests are failing when run as an unprivileged user in
thread_create() ... because default limit for threads (160) is too
low ! When run as root, the limit value (2500) seems to be high enough.
So should we increase the default limits? It's
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:13:35PM +0100, Nicolas Joly wrote:
That make a 80 CPUs host require a thread limit value of 814
(=261+7*79) to be able to run this test.
Sounds like a serious test case
- Jukka.
hi,
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 12:53:28AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
(one nfsro test currently fails with EROFS vs. EACCES. Hopefully
someone else can debate the correct errno)
the NFS ACCESS procedure, which is used for open time permission checks,
does not have a way to
hi,
Module Name: src
Committed By: pooka
Date: Fri Dec 31 18:16:41 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/tests/fs/common: h_fsmacros.h
Log Message:
Introduce r/o tests. They do two mounts: the first one is r/w and
runs a generator which primes the fs. The second one is r/o and
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 12:53:28AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
(one nfsro test currently fails with EROFS vs. EACCES. Hopefully
someone else can debate the correct errno)
the NFS ACCESS procedure, which is used for open time permission checks,
does not have a way to distinguish
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 07:45:26PM +, David Laight wrote:
[...]
From what I remember of the NFS protocol, the following 'rules' applied:
1) If you export part of a filesystem, you export all of the filesystem.
that's probably trye
2) If you give anyone access, you give everyone access.
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 05:26:29AM +, David Holland wrote:
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 05:22:32AM +, David Holland wrote:
It would also be worthwhile to test that nfsd doesn't allow writing
via read-only handles, but that's a different issue and will require a
different test
On Sat, Jan 01, 2011 at 03:02:00PM +0200, Antti Kantee wrote:
It is possible that netbsd's nfs server does additional checks but
they are expensive to do on every nfs request.
That's good advise to someone who is configuring an nfs server.
...which is to say, it's not relevant to this
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 05:22:32AM +, David Holland wrote:
It would also be worthwhile to test that nfsd doesn't allow writing
via read-only handles, but that's a different issue and will require a
different test framework that sends raw nfs packets.
Hmm, no, maybe I misunderstood.
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 06:16:41PM +, Antti Kantee wrote:
Module Name: src
Committed By: pooka
Date: Fri Dec 31 18:16:41 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/tests/fs/common: h_fsmacros.h
Log Message:
Introduce r/o tests. They do two mounts: the first one is r/w and
runs a
12 matches
Mail list logo
