From: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
To: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net, liwan@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] runltp: export initialized LTP_DEV
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:07:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150120140704.GA15452@rei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8593d893c637eadbac85711428be570e2636ef38.1421761305.git.jstancek@redhat.com>
> commit 5c7c3fb219957484db92111d423e4e2553fb580b removed initialization
> of empty LTP_DEV from setup(), but it also caused that LTP_DEV
> is no longer exported when it's initialized in set_block_device().
>
> This causes every test to attempt to get loop device on its own,
> which is not necessary and it also makes tests sporadically fail with EBUSY:
> creat06 9 TBROK : tst_device.c:156: ioctl(/dev/loop1, LOOP_CLR_FD, 0) failed: EBUSY
> creat06 10 TBROK : tst_device.c:156: Remaining cases broken
>
> The cause of EBUSY is unknown. Cyril suggested it might be gvfsd-trash,
> however I don't have such process and still get the failures sporadically.
The EBUSY I've seen was from umount() rather that from ioctl() and was
caused by stat() from gvfsd-trash. I'm sure of it.
In that case one of the testcases fails to umount the device as:
acct01 0 TWARN : acct01.c:225: umount device:/dev/loop1 failed: errno=EBUSY(16): Device or resource busy
I've never seen EBUSY from the ioctl() that removes the loop device,
that looks like a kernel bug to me.
> This patch restores behavior from ltp-20140828, where LTP_DEV is exported
> and tst_acquire_device() will use that instead of trying to acquire/release
> loopdev on its own.
That wouldn't do because that breaks the exectuion when device was not
passed to runltp. What about exporting it but only when it's non-empty?
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn.
Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
next parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-20 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <8593d893c637eadbac85711428be570e2636ef38.1421761305.git.jstancek@redhat.com>
2015-01-20 14:07 ` Cyril Hrubis [this message]
2015-01-20 14:25 ` [LTP] [PATCH] runltp: export initialized LTP_DEV Cyril Hrubis
2015-01-20 14:44 ` Cyril Hrubis
[not found] ` <1705158126.11277852.1421766771922.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
2015-01-20 15:20 ` Cyril Hrubis
[not found] ` <54BF77F1.4050007@redhat.com>
2015-01-21 10:36 ` Cyril Hrubis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150120140704.GA15452@rei \
--to=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
--cc=liwan@redhat.com \
--cc=ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox