Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 12, 2021. It is now read-only.

Errors in running posix filesystem conformance tests #826

Closed
GabyCT opened this issue Oct 16, 2018 · 8 comments
Closed

Errors in running posix filesystem conformance tests #826

GabyCT opened this issue Oct 16, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

@GabyCT
Copy link
Contributor

GabyCT commented Oct 16, 2018

While running the posix filesystem conformance tests (https://github.com/pjd/pjdfstest), we are getting the following errors

Test Summary Report
-------------------
./tests/chmod/12.t          (Wstat: 0 Tests: 14 Failed: 6)
  Failed tests:  3-4, 7-8, 11-12
./tests/link/00.t           (Wstat: 0 Tests: 202 Failed: 10)
  Failed tests:  135-136, 142-143, 149-150, 156-157, 163-164
./tests/mkdir/00.t          (Wstat: 0 Tests: 36 Failed: 2)
  Failed tests:  33-34
./tests/mkfifo/00.t         (Wstat: 0 Tests: 36 Failed: 2)
  Failed tests:  33-34
./tests/mknod/00.t          (Wstat: 0 Tests: 36 Failed: 2)
  Failed tests:  33-34
./tests/mknod/11.t          (Wstat: 0 Tests: 28 Failed: 4)
  Failed tests:  12-13, 25-26
./tests/open/00.t           (Wstat: 0 Tests: 47 Failed: 2)
  Failed tests:  33-34
Files=232, Tests=8789, 704 wallclock secs ( 1.69 usr  1.17 sys + 21.37 cusr 276.72 csys = 300.95 CPU)
Result: FAIL

This is the setup that I am using:

# `kata-env`

Output of "`/usr/local/bin/kata-runtime kata-env`":
```toml
[Meta]
  Version = "1.0.18"

[Runtime]
  Debug = true
  Path = "/usr/local/bin/kata-runtime"
  [Runtime.Version]
    Semver = "1.3.0"
    Commit = "d00742f43f3fb1177e74d864e47a1bae697c2d73"
    OCI = "1.0.1"
  [Runtime.Config]
    Path = "/usr/share/defaults/kata-containers/configuration.toml"

[Hypervisor]
  MachineType = "pc"
  Version = "QEMU emulator version 2.11.0\nCopyright (c) 2003-2017 Fabrice Bellard and the QEMU Project developers"
  Path = "/usr/bin/qemu-lite-system-x86_64"
  BlockDeviceDriver = "virtio-scsi"
  EntropySource = "/dev/urandom"
  Msize9p = 8192
  MemorySlots = 10
  Debug = true
  UseVSock = false

[Image]
  Path = "/usr/share/kata-containers/kata-containers-image_clearlinux_1.3.0_agent_042c3ebd71c.img"

[Kernel]
  Path = "/usr/share/kata-containers/vmlinuz-4.14.67-13"
  Parameters = "agent.log=debug"

[Initrd]
  Path = ""

[Proxy]
  Type = "kataProxy"
  Version = "kata-proxy version 1.3.0-6ddb006ad3f709cab018af9dc0bf9e756c3ce2cd"
  Path = "/usr/libexec/kata-containers/kata-proxy"
  Debug = true

[Shim]
  Type = "kataShim"
  Version = "kata-shim version 1.3.0-5fbf1f0919ce0bb1f2b7e85692cdf3058023926f"
  Path = "/usr/libexec/kata-containers/kata-shim"
  Debug = true

[Agent]
  Type = "kata"

[Host]
  Kernel = "4.15.0-1023-azure"
  Architecture = "amd64"
  VMContainerCapable = true
  SupportVSocks = false
  [Host.Distro]
    Name = "Ubuntu"
    Version = "16.04"
  [Host.CPU]
    Vendor = "GenuineIntel"
    Model = "Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 @ 2.30GHz"

[Netmon]
  Version = "kata-netmon version 1.3.0"
  Path = "/usr/libexec/kata-containers/kata-netmon"
  Debug = true
  Enable = false
@grahamwhaley
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the report @GabyCT - are you going to dig into those to work out why they fail?

@GabyCT
Copy link
Contributor Author

GabyCT commented Oct 19, 2018

@grahamwhaley yes, I will take a look

@GabyCT
Copy link
Contributor Author

GabyCT commented Oct 23, 2018

While running the conformance tests with runc no failures were found. However, if we run with kata but using devicemapper we only have 2 failures

Test Summary Report
-------------------
./tests/chown/00.t          (Wstat: 0 Tests: 1323 Failed: 0)
  TODO passed:   693, 697, 708-709, 714-715, 729, 733
./tests/symlink/03.t        (Wstat: 0 Tests: 6 Failed: 2)
  Failed tests:  1-2
Files=232, Tests=8789, 181 wallclock secs ( 1.48 usr  0.36 sys + 21.71 cusr 10.53 csys = 34.08 CPU)
Result: FAIL

@grahamwhaley
Copy link
Contributor

Just to be clear then, we are noting that 9pfs has a lot more failures than devicemapper, yes?
(which, is not unexpected I think, and possibly not something we can do too much about ;-) )

@GabyCT
Copy link
Contributor Author

GabyCT commented Oct 23, 2018

Yes, overlay2 has 34 failures and devicemapper only 2 failures

@jodh-intel
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @GabyCT - a few questions:

  • Could we run these tests as part of the CI?
    • How long do they take to run?
  • If we could run them under the CI in a reasonable amount of time, could we ensure that these two tests fail (assert that behaviour) and that the others pass?

@GabyCT
Copy link
Contributor Author

GabyCT commented Oct 24, 2018

@jodh-intel , I already submitted a PR kata-containers/tests#815 :)

@jodh-intel
Copy link
Contributor

@GabyCT - thanks!

egernst pushed a commit to egernst/runtime that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2021
…sue-backlog

action: Add issue to project and move to "In progress" on linked PR
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants