Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 6 Sep 2022 08:27:14 -0400
To:     Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc:     Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Subject: Re: nfs/001 failing
Message-ID: <20220906122714.GA25323@fieldses.org>
References: <BF47B6B7-CB52-4E14-94B0-E28FD5C52234@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BF47B6B7-CB52-4E14-94B0-E28FD5C52234@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
From:   bfields@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields)
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:29:16PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> Bruce reminded me I'm not the only one seeing this failure
> these days:
> 
> > nfs/001 4s ... - output mismatch (see /root/xfstests-dev/results//nfs/001.out.bad)
> >    --- tests/nfs/001.out	2019-12-20 17:34:10.569343364 -0500
> >    +++ /root/xfstests-dev/results//nfs/001.out.bad	2022-09-04 20:01:35.502462323 -0400
> >    @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
> >     QA output created by 001
> >    -203
> >    +3
> >    ...
> 
> I'm looking at about 5 other priority bugs at the moment. Can
> someone else do a little triage?

For what it's worth, a bisect lands on
c0cbe70742f4a70893cd6e5f6b10b6e89b6db95b "NFSD: add posix ACLs to struct
nfsd_attrs".

Haven't really looked at nfs/001 except to note it does have something
to do with ACLs, so that checks out....

--b.