I finally got my kdevops (https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops) test
rig working well enough to get some publishable results. To run fstests,
kdevops will spin up a server and (in this case) 2 clients to run
xfstests' auto group. One client mounts with default options, and the
other uses NFSv3.
I tested 3 kernels:
v6.4.0 (stock release)
6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab (Linus' tree as of a couple of days ago)
6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91 (linux-next as of yesterday morning)
Here are the results summary of all 3:
KERNEL: 6.4.0
CPUS: 8
nfs_v3: 727 tests, 12 failures, 569 skipped, 14863 seconds
Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/124
generic/193 generic/258 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
generic/444 generic/528 generic/529
nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 452 skipped, 21899 seconds
Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
generic/187 generic/193 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
generic/357 generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/528
generic/529 generic/578 generic/675 generic/688
Totals: 1454 tests, 1021 skipped, 30 failures, 0 errors, 35096s
KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab
CPUS: 8
nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14775 seconds
Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
nfs_default: 727 tests, 16 failures, 453 skipped, 22326 seconds
Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
generic/675 generic/688
Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 25 failures, 0 errors, 35396s
KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91
CPUS: 8
nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14657 seconds
Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 453 skipped, 21757 seconds
Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
generic/675 generic/683 generic/684 generic/688
Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 27 failures, 0 errors, 34870s
With NFSv4.2, v6.4.0 has 2 extra failures that the current mainline
kernel doesn't:
generic/193 (some sort of setattr problem)
generic/528 (known problem with btime handling in client that has been fixed)
While I haven't investigated, I'm assuming the 193 bug is also something
that has been fixed in recent kernels. There are also 3 other NFSv3
tests that started passing since v6.4.0. I haven't looked into those.
With the linux-next kernel there are 2 new regressions:
generic/683
generic/684
Both of these look like problems with setuid/setgid stripping, and still
need to be investigated. I have more verbose result info on the test
failures if anyone is interested.
Cheers,
--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:22 AM Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 14:04 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> >
> > > On Aug 17, 2023, at 7:21 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I finally got my kdevops (https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops) test
> > > rig working well enough to get some publishable results. To run fstests,
> > > kdevops will spin up a server and (in this case) 2 clients to run
> > > xfstests' auto group. One client mounts with default options, and the
> > > other uses NFSv3.
> > >
> > > I tested 3 kernels:
> > >
> > > v6.4.0 (stock release)
> > > 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab (Linus' tree as of a couple of days ago)
> > > 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91 (linux-next as of yesterday morning)
> > >
> > > Here are the results summary of all 3:
> > >
> > > KERNEL: 6.4.0
> > > CPUS: 8
> > >
> > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 12 failures, 569 skipped, 14863 seconds
> > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/124
> > > generic/193 generic/258 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > generic/444 generic/528 generic/529
> > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 452 skipped, 21899 seconds
> > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > generic/187 generic/193 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > generic/357 generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/528
> > > generic/529 generic/578 generic/675 generic/688
> > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1021 skipped, 30 failures, 0 errors, 35096s
> > >
> > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab
> > > CPUS: 8
> > >
> > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14775 seconds
> > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 16 failures, 453 skipped, 22326 seconds
> > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > generic/675 generic/688
> > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 25 failures, 0 errors, 35396s
> > >
> > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91
> > > CPUS: 8
> > >
> > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14657 seconds
> > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 453 skipped, 21757 seconds
> > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > generic/675 generic/683 generic/684 generic/688
> > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 27 failures, 0 errors, 34870s
As long as we're sharing results ... here is what I'm seeing with a
6.5-rc6 client & server:
anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb xunit list --results --runid 1741 --color=none
+------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
| run | device | xunit | hostname | pass | fail |
skip | time |
+------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
| 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-3 | client | 125 | 4 |
464 | 447 s |
| 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.0 | client | 117 | 11 |
465 | 478 s |
| 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.1 | client | 119 | 12 |
462 | 404 s |
| 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.2 | client | 212 | 18 |
363 | 564 s |
+------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb show --failure 1741 --color=none
+-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| testcase | tcp-3 | tcp-4.0 | tcp-4.1 | tcp-4.2 |
+-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| generic/053 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/099 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/105 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/140 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
| generic/188 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
| generic/258 | failure | passed | passed | failure |
| generic/294 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/318 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/319 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/357 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
| generic/444 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/465 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/513 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
| generic/529 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| generic/604 | passed | passed | failure | passed |
| generic/675 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
| generic/688 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
| generic/697 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
| nfs/002 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
+-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > >
> > > With NFSv4.2, v6.4.0 has 2 extra failures that the current mainline
> > > kernel doesn't:
> > >
> > > generic/193 (some sort of setattr problem)
> > > generic/528 (known problem with btime handling in client that has been fixed)
> > >
> > > While I haven't investigated, I'm assuming the 193 bug is also something
> > > that has been fixed in recent kernels. There are also 3 other NFSv3
> > > tests that started passing since v6.4.0. I haven't looked into those.
> > >
> > > With the linux-next kernel there are 2 new regressions:
> > >
> > > generic/683
> > > generic/684
> > >
> > > Both of these look like problems with setuid/setgid stripping, and still
> > > need to be investigated. I have more verbose result info on the test
> > > failures if anyone is interested.
Interesting that I'm not seeing the 683 & 684 failures. What type of
filesystem is your server exporting?
> >
> > 100% awesome sauce. Out of curiosity:
> >
> > Does kdevops have a way of publishing (via an autonomous web site)
> > and archiving these results?
> >
>
> There's nothing much prewritten for this. There is some support for
> sending emails when you run a "ci" loop. I need to do more investigation
> here.
xfstests has an option to generate an xunit file, which can help here.
I use with my own archiving tool to stick everything into a sqlite
database (https://git.nowheycreamery.com/anna/xfstestsdb).
>
> Note that there has been some parallel effort toward CI in the SMB space
> using buildbot. It may worthwhile to consider combining efforts somehow.
It might be nice to at least see what they're doing. If they have
something that works well, then setting up something similar might be
a good idea.
Anna
>
> > Does the "auto" group include tests that require a SCRATCH_DEV?
> >
>
> Yes. The nfs server is configured with 2 exported fs', so I have it
> mounting a directory under one as "test" and the other as "scratch".
> --
> Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 14:04 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
>
> > On Aug 17, 2023, at 7:21 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I finally got my kdevops (https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops) test
> > rig working well enough to get some publishable results. To run fstests,
> > kdevops will spin up a server and (in this case) 2 clients to run
> > xfstests' auto group. One client mounts with default options, and the
> > other uses NFSv3.
> >
> > I tested 3 kernels:
> >
> > v6.4.0 (stock release)
> > 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab (Linus' tree as of a couple of days ago)
> > 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91 (linux-next as of yesterday morning)
> >
> > Here are the results summary of all 3:
> >
> > KERNEL: 6.4.0
> > CPUS: 8
> >
> > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 12 failures, 569 skipped, 14863 seconds
> > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/124
> > generic/193 generic/258 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > generic/444 generic/528 generic/529
> > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 452 skipped, 21899 seconds
> > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > generic/187 generic/193 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > generic/357 generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/528
> > generic/529 generic/578 generic/675 generic/688
> > Totals: 1454 tests, 1021 skipped, 30 failures, 0 errors, 35096s
> >
> > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab
> > CPUS: 8
> >
> > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14775 seconds
> > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > nfs_default: 727 tests, 16 failures, 453 skipped, 22326 seconds
> > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > generic/675 generic/688
> > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 25 failures, 0 errors, 35396s
> >
> > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91
> > CPUS: 8
> >
> > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14657 seconds
> > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 453 skipped, 21757 seconds
> > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > generic/675 generic/683 generic/684 generic/688
> > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 27 failures, 0 errors, 34870s
> >
> > With NFSv4.2, v6.4.0 has 2 extra failures that the current mainline
> > kernel doesn't:
> >
> > generic/193 (some sort of setattr problem)
> > generic/528 (known problem with btime handling in client that has been fixed)
> >
> > While I haven't investigated, I'm assuming the 193 bug is also something
> > that has been fixed in recent kernels. There are also 3 other NFSv3
> > tests that started passing since v6.4.0. I haven't looked into those.
> >
> > With the linux-next kernel there are 2 new regressions:
> >
> > generic/683
> > generic/684
> >
> > Both of these look like problems with setuid/setgid stripping, and still
> > need to be investigated. I have more verbose result info on the test
> > failures if anyone is interested.
>
> 100% awesome sauce. Out of curiosity:
>
> Does kdevops have a way of publishing (via an autonomous web site)
> and archiving these results?
>
There's nothing much prewritten for this. There is some support for
sending emails when you run a "ci" loop. I need to do more investigation
here.
Note that there has been some parallel effort toward CI in the SMB space
using buildbot. It may worthwhile to consider combining efforts somehow.
> Does the "auto" group include tests that require a SCRATCH_DEV?
>
Yes. The nfs server is configured with 2 exported fs', so I have it
mounting a directory under one as "test" and the other as "scratch".
--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 11:17 -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:22 AM Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 14:04 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Aug 17, 2023, at 7:21 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I finally got my kdevops (https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops) test
> > > > rig working well enough to get some publishable results. To run fstests,
> > > > kdevops will spin up a server and (in this case) 2 clients to run
> > > > xfstests' auto group. One client mounts with default options, and the
> > > > other uses NFSv3.
> > > >
> > > > I tested 3 kernels:
> > > >
> > > > v6.4.0 (stock release)
> > > > 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab (Linus' tree as of a couple of days ago)
> > > > 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91 (linux-next as of yesterday morning)
> > > >
> > > > Here are the results summary of all 3:
> > > >
> > > > KERNEL: 6.4.0
> > > > CPUS: 8
> > > >
> > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 12 failures, 569 skipped, 14863 seconds
> > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/124
> > > > generic/193 generic/258 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > > generic/444 generic/528 generic/529
> > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 452 skipped, 21899 seconds
> > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > generic/187 generic/193 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > > generic/357 generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/528
> > > > generic/529 generic/578 generic/675 generic/688
> > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1021 skipped, 30 failures, 0 errors, 35096s
> > > >
> > > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab
> > > > CPUS: 8
> > > >
> > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14775 seconds
> > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 16 failures, 453 skipped, 22326 seconds
> > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > > generic/675 generic/688
> > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 25 failures, 0 errors, 35396s
> > > >
> > > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91
> > > > CPUS: 8
> > > >
> > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14657 seconds
> > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 453 skipped, 21757 seconds
> > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > > generic/675 generic/683 generic/684 generic/688
> > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 27 failures, 0 errors, 34870s
>
> As long as we're sharing results ... here is what I'm seeing with a
> 6.5-rc6 client & server:
>
> anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb xunit list --results --runid 1741 --color=none
> +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > run | device | xunit | hostname | pass | fail |
> skip | time |
> +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-3 | client | 125 | 4 |
> 464 | 447 s |
> > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.0 | client | 117 | 11 |
> 465 | 478 s |
> > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.1 | client | 119 | 12 |
> 462 | 404 s |
> > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.2 | client | 212 | 18 |
> 363 | 564 s |
> +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
>
> anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb show --failure 1741 --color=none
> +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > testcase | tcp-3 | tcp-4.0 | tcp-4.1 | tcp-4.2 |
> +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > generic/053 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/099 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/105 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/140 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > generic/188 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > generic/258 | failure | passed | passed | failure |
> > generic/294 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/318 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/319 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/357 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > generic/444 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/465 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/513 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > generic/529 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > generic/604 | passed | passed | failure | passed |
> > generic/675 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > generic/688 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > generic/697 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > nfs/002 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
>
>
> > > >
> > > > With NFSv4.2, v6.4.0 has 2 extra failures that the current mainline
> > > > kernel doesn't:
> > > >
> > > > generic/193 (some sort of setattr problem)
> > > > generic/528 (known problem with btime handling in client that has been fixed)
> > > >
> > > > While I haven't investigated, I'm assuming the 193 bug is also something
> > > > that has been fixed in recent kernels. There are also 3 other NFSv3
> > > > tests that started passing since v6.4.0. I haven't looked into those.
> > > >
> > > > With the linux-next kernel there are 2 new regressions:
> > > >
> > > > generic/683
> > > > generic/684
> > > >
> > > > Both of these look like problems with setuid/setgid stripping, and still
> > > > need to be investigated. I have more verbose result info on the test
> > > > failures if anyone is interested.
>
> Interesting that I'm not seeing the 683 & 684 failures. What type of
> filesystem is your server exporting?
>
btrfs
You are testing linux-next? I need to go back and confirm these results
too.
> > >
> > > 100% awesome sauce. Out of curiosity:
> > >
> > > Does kdevops have a way of publishing (via an autonomous web site)
> > > and archiving these results?
> > >
> >
> > There's nothing much prewritten for this. There is some support for
> > sending emails when you run a "ci" loop. I need to do more investigation
> > here.
>
> xfstests has an option to generate an xunit file, which can help here.
> I use with my own archiving tool to stick everything into a sqlite
> database (https://git.nowheycreamery.com/anna/xfstestsdb).
>
Yeah, kdevops uses the xunit file to generate its results, AFAIU. TBH, a
lot of the automation surrounding how to collate and evaluate test
results is still something I need to look at more closely. It's not well
documented and is still under pretty heavy development.
> >
> > Note that there has been some parallel effort toward CI in the SMB space
> > using buildbot. It may worthwhile to consider combining efforts somehow.
>
> It might be nice to at least see what they're doing. If they have
> something that works well, then setting up something similar might be
> a good idea.
>
Just my gut feel is that kdevops seems to be more geared toward
"maintainer wants to see a set of results vs. particular kernels",
whereas buildbot seems to be more geared toward automation, and CI type
workloads. There are some CI-ish automation bits in kdevops, but doesn't
seem to be as straightforward as what buildbot has.
--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> On Aug 17, 2023, at 7:21 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I finally got my kdevops (https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops) test
> rig working well enough to get some publishable results. To run fstests,
> kdevops will spin up a server and (in this case) 2 clients to run
> xfstests' auto group. One client mounts with default options, and the
> other uses NFSv3.
>
> I tested 3 kernels:
>
> v6.4.0 (stock release)
> 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab (Linus' tree as of a couple of days ago)
> 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91 (linux-next as of yesterday morning)
>
> Here are the results summary of all 3:
>
> KERNEL: 6.4.0
> CPUS: 8
>
> nfs_v3: 727 tests, 12 failures, 569 skipped, 14863 seconds
> Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/124
> generic/193 generic/258 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> generic/444 generic/528 generic/529
> nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 452 skipped, 21899 seconds
> Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> generic/187 generic/193 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> generic/357 generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/528
> generic/529 generic/578 generic/675 generic/688
> Totals: 1454 tests, 1021 skipped, 30 failures, 0 errors, 35096s
>
> KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab
> CPUS: 8
>
> nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14775 seconds
> Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> nfs_default: 727 tests, 16 failures, 453 skipped, 22326 seconds
> Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> generic/675 generic/688
> Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 25 failures, 0 errors, 35396s
>
> KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91
> CPUS: 8
>
> nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14657 seconds
> Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 453 skipped, 21757 seconds
> Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> generic/675 generic/683 generic/684 generic/688
> Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 27 failures, 0 errors, 34870s
>
> With NFSv4.2, v6.4.0 has 2 extra failures that the current mainline
> kernel doesn't:
>
> generic/193 (some sort of setattr problem)
> generic/528 (known problem with btime handling in client that has been fixed)
>
> While I haven't investigated, I'm assuming the 193 bug is also something
> that has been fixed in recent kernels. There are also 3 other NFSv3
> tests that started passing since v6.4.0. I haven't looked into those.
>
> With the linux-next kernel there are 2 new regressions:
>
> generic/683
> generic/684
>
> Both of these look like problems with setuid/setgid stripping, and still
> need to be investigated. I have more verbose result info on the test
> failures if anyone is interested.
100% awesome sauce. Out of curiosity:
Does kdevops have a way of publishing (via an autonomous web site)
and archiving these results?
Does the "auto" group include tests that require a SCRATCH_DEV?
--
Chuck Lever
On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 15:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> On 8/17/23 3:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > On 8/17/23 2:07 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 13:15 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 16:31 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > > > > > On Aug 17, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 11:17 -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:22 AM Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 14:04 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Aug 17, 2023, at 7:21 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I finally got my kdevops
> > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops) test
> > > > > > > > > > rig working well enough to get some publishable results. To
> > > > > > > > > > run fstests,
> > > > > > > > > > kdevops will spin up a server and (in this case) 2 clients to run
> > > > > > > > > > xfstests' auto group. One client mounts with default options,
> > > > > > > > > > and the
> > > > > > > > > > other uses NFSv3.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I tested 3 kernels:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > v6.4.0 (stock release)
> > > > > > > > > > 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab (Linus' tree as of a couple of days ago)
> > > > > > > > > > 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91 (linux-next as of
> > > > > > > > > > yesterday morning)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Here are the results summary of all 3:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > KERNEL: 6.4.0
> > > > > > > > > > CPUS: 8
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 12 failures, 569 skipped, 14863 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/124
> > > > > > > > > > generic/193 generic/258 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > > > > > > > > generic/444 generic/528 generic/529
> > > > > > > > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 452 skipped, 21899 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > > > > > > > generic/187 generic/193 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > > > > > > > > generic/357 generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/528
> > > > > > > > > > generic/529 generic/578 generic/675 generic/688
> > > > > > > > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1021 skipped, 30 failures, 0 errors, 35096s
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab
> > > > > > > > > > CPUS: 8
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14775 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > > > > > > > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > > > > > > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 16 failures, 453 skipped, 22326 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > > > > > > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > > > > > > > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > > > > > > > > generic/675 generic/688
> > > > > > > > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 25 failures, 0 errors, 35396s
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91
> > > > > > > > > > CPUS: 8
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14657 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > > > > > > > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > > > > > > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 453 skipped, 21757 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > > > > > > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > > > > > > > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > > > > > > > > generic/675 generic/683 generic/684 generic/688
> > > > > > > > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 27 failures, 0 errors, 34870s
> > > > > > > As long as we're sharing results ... here is what I'm seeing with a
> > > > > > > 6.5-rc6 client & server:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb xunit list --results --runid 1741
> > > > > > > --color=none
> > > > > > > +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > run | device | xunit | hostname | pass | fail |
> > > > > > > skip | time |
> > > > > > > +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-3 | client | 125 | 4 |
> > > > > > > 464 | 447 s |
> > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.0 | client | 117 | 11 |
> > > > > > > 465 | 478 s |
> > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.1 | client | 119 | 12 |
> > > > > > > 462 | 404 s |
> > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.2 | client | 212 | 18 |
> > > > > > > 363 | 564 s |
> > > > > > > +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb show --failure 1741 --color=none
> > > > > > > +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > > > > > > > testcase | tcp-3 | tcp-4.0 | tcp-4.1 | tcp-4.2 |
> > > > > > > +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > > > > > > > generic/053 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/099 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/105 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/140 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/188 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/258 | failure | passed | passed | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/294 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/318 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/319 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/357 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/444 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/465 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/513 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/529 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/604 | passed | passed | failure | passed |
> > > > > > > > generic/675 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/688 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > generic/697 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > nfs/002 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > With NFSv4.2, v6.4.0 has 2 extra failures that the current
> > > > > > > > > > mainline
> > > > > > > > > > kernel doesn't:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > generic/193 (some sort of setattr problem)
> > > > > > > > > > generic/528 (known problem with btime handling in client
> > > > > > > > > > that has been fixed)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > While I haven't investigated, I'm assuming the 193 bug is also
> > > > > > > > > > something
> > > > > > > > > > that has been fixed in recent kernels. There are also 3 other
> > > > > > > > > > NFSv3
> > > > > > > > > > tests that started passing since v6.4.0. I haven't looked into
> > > > > > > > > > those.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > With the linux-next kernel there are 2 new regressions:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > generic/683
> > > > > > > > > > generic/684
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Both of these look like problems with setuid/setgid stripping,
> > > > > > > > > > and still
> > > > > > > > > > need to be investigated. I have more verbose result info on
> > > > > > > > > > the test
> > > > > > > > > > failures if anyone is interested.
> > > > > > > Interesting that I'm not seeing the 683 & 684 failures. What type of
> > > > > > > filesystem is your server exporting?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > btrfs
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You are testing linux-next? I need to go back and confirm these
> > > > > > results
> > > > > > too.
> > > > > IMO linux-next is quite important : we keep hitting bugs that
> > > > > appear only after integration -- block and network changes in
> > > > > other trees especially can impact the NFS drivers.
> > > > >
> > > > Indeed, I suspect this is probably something from the vfs tree (though
> > > > we definitely need to confirm that). Today I'm testing:
> > > >
> > > > 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230817-g47762f086974
> > > >
> > > Nope, I was wrong. I ran a bisect and it landed here. I confirmed it by
> > > turning off leases on the nfs server and the test started passing. I
> > > probably won't have the cycles to chase this down further.
> > >
> > > The capture looks something like this:
> > >
> > > OPEN (get a write delegation
> > > WRITE
> > > CLOSE
> > > SETATTR (mode 06666)
> > >
> > > ...then presumably a task on the client opens the file again, but the
> > > setuid bits don't get stripped.
> > >
> > > I think either the client will need to strip these bits on a delegated
> > > open, or we'll need to recall write delegations from the client when it
> > > tries to do a SETATTR with a mode that could later end up needing to be
> > > stripped on a subsequent open:
> > >
> > > 66ce3e3b98a7a9e970ea463a7f7dc0575c0a244b is the first bad commit
> > > commit 66ce3e3b98a7a9e970ea463a7f7dc0575c0a244b
> > > Author: Dai Ngo <[email protected]>
> > > Date: Thu Jun 29 18:52:40 2023 -0700
> > >
> > > NFSD: Enable write delegation support
> >
> > The SETATTR should cause the delegation to be recalled. However, I think
> > there is an optimization on server that skips the recall if the SETATTR
> > comes from the same client that has the delegation.
>
> The optimization on the server was done by this commit:
>
> 28df3d1539de nfsd: clients don't need to break their own delegations
>
> Perhaps we should allow this optimization for read delegation only?
>
> Or should the NFS client be responsible for handling the SETATTR and
> and local OPEN on the file that has write delegation granted?
>
I think that setuid/setgid files are really a special case.
We already avoid giving out delegations on setuid/gid files. What we're
not doing currently is revoking the write delegation if the holder tries
to set a mode that involves a setuid/gid bit. If we add that, then that
should close the hole, I think.
--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 12:51 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> On 8/22/23 10:02 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 09:07 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> > > On 8/17/23 4:08 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 15:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > > On 8/17/23 3:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > > > On 8/17/23 2:07 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 13:15 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 16:31 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Aug 17, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 11:17 -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:22 AM Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 14:04 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 17, 2023, at 7:21 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I finally got my kdevops
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops) test
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rig working well enough to get some publishable results. To
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > run fstests,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > kdevops will spin up a server and (in this case) 2 clients to run
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > xfstests' auto group. One client mounts with default options,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > other uses NFSv3.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I tested 3 kernels:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > v6.4.0 (stock release)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab (Linus' tree as of a couple of days ago)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91 (linux-next as of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > yesterday morning)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here are the results summary of all 3:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > KERNEL: 6.4.0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CPUS: 8
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 12 failures, 569 skipped, 14863 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/124
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/193 generic/258 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/444 generic/528 generic/529
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 452 skipped, 21899 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/187 generic/193 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/357 generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/528
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/529 generic/578 generic/675 generic/688
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1021 skipped, 30 failures, 0 errors, 35096s
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-g4853c74bd7ab
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CPUS: 8
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14775 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 16 failures, 453 skipped, 22326 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/675 generic/688
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 25 failures, 0 errors, 35396s
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > KERNEL: 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230816-gef66bf8aeb91
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CPUS: 8
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > nfs_v3: 727 tests, 9 failures, 570 skipped, 14657 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/258
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/444 generic/529
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > nfs_default: 727 tests, 18 failures, 453 skipped, 21757 seconds
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Failures: generic/053 generic/099 generic/105 generic/186
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/187 generic/294 generic/318 generic/319 generic/357
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/444 generic/486 generic/513 generic/529 generic/578
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/675 generic/683 generic/684 generic/688
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Totals: 1454 tests, 1023 skipped, 27 failures, 0 errors, 34870s
> > > > > > > > > > > As long as we're sharing results ... here is what I'm seeing with a
> > > > > > > > > > > 6.5-rc6 client & server:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb xunit list --results --runid 1741
> > > > > > > > > > > --color=none
> > > > > > > > > > > +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > run | device | xunit | hostname | pass | fail |
> > > > > > > > > > > skip | time |
> > > > > > > > > > > +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-3 | client | 125 | 4 |
> > > > > > > > > > > 464 | 447 s |
> > > > > > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.0 | client | 117 | 11 |
> > > > > > > > > > > 465 | 478 s |
> > > > > > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.1 | client | 119 | 12 |
> > > > > > > > > > > 462 | 404 s |
> > > > > > > > > > > > 1741 | server:/srv/xfs/test | tcp-4.2 | client | 212 | 18 |
> > > > > > > > > > > 363 | 564 s |
> > > > > > > > > > > +------+----------------------+---------+----------+------+------+------+-------+
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > anna@gouda ~ % xfstestsdb show --failure 1741 --color=none
> > > > > > > > > > > +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > > > > > > > > > > > testcase | tcp-3 | tcp-4.0 | tcp-4.1 | tcp-4.2 |
> > > > > > > > > > > +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/053 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/099 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/105 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/140 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/188 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/258 | failure | passed | passed | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/294 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/318 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/319 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/357 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/444 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/465 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/513 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/529 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/604 | passed | passed | failure | passed |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/675 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/688 | skipped | skipped | skipped | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > generic/697 | passed | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > > nfs/002 | failure | failure | failure | failure |
> > > > > > > > > > > +-------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > With NFSv4.2, v6.4.0 has 2 extra failures that the current
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > mainline
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > kernel doesn't:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/193 (some sort of setattr problem)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/528 (known problem with btime handling in client
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that has been fixed)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > While I haven't investigated, I'm assuming the 193 bug is also
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > something
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that has been fixed in recent kernels. There are also 3 other
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > NFSv3
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > tests that started passing since v6.4.0. I haven't looked into
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > With the linux-next kernel there are 2 new regressions:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/683
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > generic/684
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Both of these look like problems with setuid/setgid stripping,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and still
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to be investigated. I have more verbose result info on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the test
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > failures if anyone is interested.
> > > > > > > > > > > Interesting that I'm not seeing the 683 & 684 failures. What type of
> > > > > > > > > > > filesystem is your server exporting?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > btrfs
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You are testing linux-next? I need to go back and confirm these
> > > > > > > > > > results
> > > > > > > > > > too.
> > > > > > > > > IMO linux-next is quite important : we keep hitting bugs that
> > > > > > > > > appear only after integration -- block and network changes in
> > > > > > > > > other trees especially can impact the NFS drivers.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Indeed, I suspect this is probably something from the vfs tree (though
> > > > > > > > we definitely need to confirm that). Today I'm testing:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 6.5.0-rc6-next-20230817-g47762f086974
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Nope, I was wrong. I ran a bisect and it landed here. I confirmed it by
> > > > > > > turning off leases on the nfs server and the test started passing. I
> > > > > > > probably won't have the cycles to chase this down further.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The capture looks something like this:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OPEN (get a write delegation
> > > > > > > WRITE
> > > > > > > CLOSE
> > > > > > > SETATTR (mode 06666)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ...then presumably a task on the client opens the file again, but the
> > > > > > > setuid bits don't get stripped.
> > > OPEN (get a write delegation
> > > WRITE
> > > CLOSE
> > > SETATTR (mode 06666)
> > >
> > > The client continues with:
> > >
> > > (ALLOCATE,GETATTR) <<=== this is when the server stripped the SUID and SGID bit
> > > READDIR ====> file mode shows 0666 (SUID & SGID were stripped)
> > > READDIR ====> file mode shows 0666 (SUID & SGID were stripped)
> > > DELERETURN
> > >
> > > Here is stack trace of ALLOCATE when the SUID & SGID were stripped:
> > >
> > > **** start of notify_change, notice the i_mode bits, SUID & SGID were set:
> > > [notify_change]: d_iname[a] ia_valid[0x1a00] ia_mode[0x0] i_mode[0x8db6] [nfsd:2409:Mon Aug 21 23:05:31 2023]
> > > KILL[0] KILL_SUID[1] KILL_SGID[1]
> > >
> > > **** end of notify_change, notice the i_mode bits, SUID & SGID were stripped:
> > > [notify_change]: RET[0] d_iname[a] ia_valid[0x1a01] ia_mode[0x81b6] i_mode[0x81b6] [nfsd:2409:Mon Aug 21 23:05:31 2023]
> > >
> > > **** stack trace of notify_change comes from ALLOCATE:
> > > Returning from: 0xffffffffb726e764 : notify_change+0x4/0x500 [kernel]
> > > Returning to : 0xffffffffb726bf99 : __file_remove_privs+0x119/0x170 [kernel]
> > > 0xffffffffb726cfad : file_modified_flags+0x4d/0x110 [kernel]
> > > 0xffffffffc0a2330b : xfs_file_fallocate+0xfb/0x490 [xfs]
> > > 0xffffffffb723e7d8 : vfs_fallocate+0x158/0x380 [kernel]
> > > 0xffffffffc0ddc30a : nfsd4_vfs_fallocate+0x4a/0x70 [nfsd]
> > > 0xffffffffc0def7f2 : nfsd4_allocate+0x72/0xc0 [nfsd]
> > > 0xffffffffc0df2663 : nfsd4_proc_compound+0x3d3/0x730 [nfsd]
> > > 0xffffffffc0dd633b : nfsd_dispatch+0xab/0x1d0 [nfsd]
> > > 0xffffffffc0bda476 : svc_process_common+0x306/0x6e0 [sunrpc]
> > > 0xffffffffc0bdb081 : svc_process+0x131/0x180 [sunrpc]
> > > 0xffffffffc0dd4864 : nfsd+0x84/0xd0 [nfsd]
> > > 0xffffffffb6f0bfd6 : kthread+0xe6/0x120 [kernel]
> > > 0xffffffffb6e587d4 : ret_from_fork+0x34/0x50 [kernel]
> > > 0xffffffffb6e03a3b : ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30 [kernel]
> > >
> > > I think the problem here is that the client does not update the file
> > > attribute after ALLOCATE. The GETATTR in the ALLOCATE compound does
> > > not include the mode bits.
> > >
> > Oh, interesting! Have you tried adding the FATTR4_MODE to that GETATTR
> > call on the client? Does it also fix this?
>
> Yes, this is what I'm going to try next.
>
Great. Keep us posted.
> >
> > > The READDIR's reply show the test file's mode has the SUID & SGID bit
> > > stripped (0666) but apparently these were not used o update the file
> > > attribute.
> > >
> > > The test passes when server does not grant write delegation because:
> > >
> > > OPEN
> > > WRITE
> > > CLOSE
> > > SETATTR (06666)
> > > OPEN (CLAIM_FH, NOCREATE)
> > > ALLOCATE <<=== server clear SUID & SGID
> > > GETATTR, CLOSE <<=== GETATTR has mode bit as 0666, client updates file attribute
> > > READDIR
> > > READDIR
> > >
> > > As expected, if the server recalls the write delegation when SETATTR
> > > with SUID/SGID set then the test passes. This is because it forces the
> > > client to send the 2nd OPEN with CLAIM_FH, NOCREATE and then the
> > > (GETATTR, CLOSE) which cause the client to update the file attribute.
> > >
> > What's your sense of the best way to fix this? The stripping of mode
> > bits isn't covered by the NFSv4 spec, so this will ultimately come down
> > to a judgment call.
>
> Yes, I did not find anything regarding stripping of SUID/SGID in the NFS4.2
> specs. It's done by the 'fs' layer and it has been there since 4/2005 in
> the big merge to Linux-2.6.12-rc2 done by Linus. So I think we should leave
> it there.
>
> The stripping makes some sense to me since if the file is being expanded
> (to be written to) then it should not an executable therefor its SUID/SGID
> should be stripped.
>
Right. The point is that POSIX requires setuid clearing, but the NFSv4
spec doesn't say anything about it. Ultimately, it's the server's
responsibility to actually clear the bits.
Having the client also fetch the mode does sound like the right thing to
do here. It should be cheap for most servers to provide anyway, given
that they will have the inode in-core.
--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>