Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from sandeen.net ([63.231.237.45]:51809 "EHLO sandeen.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753244AbbAWU2R (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:28:17 -0500 Message-ID: <54C2AEE0.3090503@sandeen.net> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:28:16 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve French CC: fstests@vger.kernel.org, "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: xfstest generic/299 References: <54C1DDA8.5040103@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 1/23/15 2:17 PM, Steve French wrote: > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Steve French wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> On 1/22/15 11:23 PM, Steve French wrote: >>>> Noticed test generic/299 failing over NFS (v4.1 dialect) with the error >>>> >>>> "[not run] /usr/bin/fio too old" >>>> >>>> fio-2.1.11 version (which is what is installed on current Ubuntu) is >>>> presumably not too old >>> >>> Well, 2.1.11 was released 16-Jul-2014 >>> >>> fio is up to 2.2.5 now, so it sure could be. >> >> I updated to 2.2.5-3 (cloning and building from the repository on >> git.kernel.org) which did not seem to change the results. >> >>> The test sets up a config file, and tries to run fio against it; >>> if it fails, it's deemed "too old" >>> >>> And _require_fio dumps to $seqres.full, >>> >>> $FIO_PROG --warnings-fatal --showcmd $job >> $seqres.full 2>&1 >>> [ $? -eq 0 ] || _notrun "$FIO_PROG too old, see $seqres.full" >>> >>> so what does 299.full look like? >> >> min value out of range: 0 (1 min) >> fio: failed parsing filesize=0 >> fio: job global dropped >> fio --ioengine=libaio --bs=128k --directory=/mnt1/scratch --size=999G >> --iodepth=128*1 --continue_on_error=write --ignore_error=,ENOSPC >> --error_dump=0 --create_on_open=1 --fallocate=none --exitall=1 >> > > Manually setting FILE_SIZE=262144 in tests/generic/299 got it > past that point (I wonder if BLOCK_SIZE is not set - where > does it get set?). > > But since it then call xfs_io falloc it is not going to work over NFSv4.1 ok, then it should have a requirement on falloc... which it does ... _require_fio $fio_config _require_xfs_io_command "falloc" so it'll gracefully _notrun due to either of those, as it should, apparently. I'd swap the two _requires, the falloc _notrun message will make more sense than the _require_fio notrun message, and save future NFS users the head-scratching you've suffered through. :) -Eric