Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 08:35:31 -0800 From: Enji Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: rgrimes@freebsd.org Cc: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r343543 - head/sbin/bectl/tests Message-ID: <82187F03-C50D-4430-9764-ABA6E28125E9@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201901290431.x0T4VrZm006702@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <201901290431.x0T4VrZm006702@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 28, 2019, at 20:31, Rodney W. Grimes <freebsd@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:09 PM Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> >>> Author: kevans >>> Date: Tue Jan 29 04:08:49 2019 >>> New Revision: 343543 >>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/343543 >>> >>> Log: >>> bectl(8) test: Force destroy the zpool in cleanup >>> >>> This is a wild guess as to why bectl tests failed once upon a time in CI, >>> given no apparent way to see a transcript of cleanup routines with Kyua. The >>> bectl tests construct a new, clean zpool for every test. The failure >>> indicated was because of a mount that was leftover from a previous test, but >>> the previous test had succeeded so it's not clear how the mount remained >>> leftover unless the `zpool get health ${pool}` had somehow failed. >>> >> >> I left out: the tests are supposed to be constructed to clean up any >> mounts that were left over in the course of the test, hence the >> assumption that the failure lies in the cleanup. Hi Rod, > From my experience as a hardware test engineer the test > setup was required to make sure any of those assumptions > are valid. Meaning that the test would have to validate > that no left over cruft was going to interfere with the > test about to be run. > > Ie, you should probably do a force destroy of the pool > *before* the test too. While this approach makes sense and is valid, it would leave open/orphaned resources after each test run (in this case a single zpool). It’s best to fix the underlying issue with how the test formulates, sets up, and tears down the zpool. Cheers, -Enji
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?82187F03-C50D-4430-9764-ABA6E28125E9>