[LU-1580] POSIX: pathconf.32: pathconf("/dev/pts/0", _PC_NAME_MAX) did not give correct results

• Type: Bug
• Resolution: Fixed
• Priority: Blocker
• Affects Version/s: Lustre 2.3.0
• Severity: 3
• Assignee: Jian Yu
• Reporter: Maloo

Description

This issue was created by maloo for Chris Gearing <[e-mail]>

This issue relates to the following test suite run: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/e8bc176e-c0a4-11e1-a5ca-52540035b04c.

The sub-test test_1 failed with the following error:

Run POSIX testsuite on /mnt/lustre failed

Info required for matching: posix 1

Issue Links

• is related to: LU-18783 pjdfstest test chmod 2 fails with ZFS 2.3.0
• is related to: LU-3587 CR_MAXSIZE is too small
• is related to: LU-18803 remove hard-coded NAME_MAX from client and server

Comments

[Jian Yu]

I just verified again that the same failure also occurred on ext4 filesystem. After updating the LSB-VSX POSIX test suite to disable the terminal file test in pathconf.32, Lustre POSIX compliance testing passed on T.pathconf test set (baseline is ext4):

Lustre branch: master
Lustre build: http://build.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-master/766/
https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/3df07240-e088-11e1-a388-52540035b04c

[Peter Jones]

Actually, Yujian is working on a fix.

[Jodi Levi (Inactive)]

This item needs to be added to the release notes.

[Jian Yu]

The unlink.6 and write.15 failures are LU-380. The readdir.6 failure is LU-379. This ticket is used to track pathconf.32 failure.

I found that while formatting a partition/disk as ext4 filesystem and run POSIX test suite on it to generate baseline, the pathconf.32 test also failed. However, if a loop device is used to be formatted as ext4, the test passed. So, the issue is related to the baseline, not Lustre.

[nasf (Inactive)]

Since Lustre never pass all the POSIX test cases. We need to check whether above failures are new ones or known issues.

[Jodi Levi (Inactive)]

Yu Jian,
Can you please take a look at this one?

[Minh Diep]

I have reproduced this manually. This seems like Posix issue
https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/2ed77eb4-d077-11e1-aa18-52540035b04c

[Minh Diep]

I'll try this manually to see if it makes a difference. This is not due to testsuite but posix detect some issue.

[Sarah Liu]

another failure: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/aeb9eac8-c57c-11e1-ab7d-52540035b04c
From the test report there are 4 failed tests, 3 of them are known issues listed in LU-380 and LU-379 while the pathconf.32 is a new one.

14:21:04:Test Name: pathconf.32 Failed
14:21:04:
14:21:04: Test Description:
14:21:04:When path does not refer to a directory, then a call to pathconf(path,
14:21:04:_PC_NAME_MAX) either returns a value of -1 and sets errno to [EINVAL],
14:21:04:or returns a valid value for

{NAME_MAX}

.
14:21:04:Posix Ref: Component PATHCONF Assertion 5.7.1.4-52(A)
14:21:04:
14:21:04: Test Strategy:
14:21:04:FOR a regular file, a FIFO (when not testing XNFS) and a terminal file
14:21:04:(when not testing XNFS)
14:21:04: OBTAIN the system value associated with pathconf() and _PC_NAME_MAX
14:21:04: VERIFY that pathconf() returned successfully or pathconf() returned
14:21:04: -1 and errno was set to EINVAL
14:21:04:
14:21:04: Test Information:
14:21:04:pathconf("/dev/pts/0", _PC_NAME_MAX) did not give correct results
14:21:04:expected: return value == -1, errno == 22 (EINVAL)
14:21:04: OR: return value != -1
14:21:04:observed: return value == -1, errno == 2 (ENOENT)