[LU-15676] Interop sanity-sec test_47: Invalid cross-device link

• Status: Open
• Project: Lustre
• Affects Version/s: Lustre 2.15.0
• Type: Bug
• Priority: Minor
• Reporter: Maloo
• Assignee: Sebastien Buisson
• Resolution: Unresolved
• Severity: 3

Description

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

This issue relates to the following test suite run: https://testing.whamcloud.com/test_sets/09838ea8-8c85-4a92-ba12-775d8994ed12

test_47 failed with the following error:

rename from encrypted to unencrypted dir should succeed

interop testing between master and 2.14

== sanity-sec test 47: encrypted file access semantics: rename/link ================================== 04:31:24 (1644381084)
10.240.24.91@tcp:/lustre /mnt/lustre lustre rw,flock,user_xattr,lazystatfs,encrypt 0 0
CMD: onyx-50vm1.onyx.whamcloud.com grep -c /mnt/lustre' ' /proc/mounts
Stopping client onyx-50vm1.onyx.whamcloud.com /mnt/lustre (opts:)
CMD: onyx-50vm1.onyx.whamcloud.com lsof -t /mnt/lustre
CMD: onyx-50vm1.onyx.whamcloud.com umount  /mnt/lustre 2>&1
Starting client: onyx-50vm1.onyx.whamcloud.com:  -o user_xattr,flock,test_dummy_encryption onyx-50vm4@tcp:/lustre /mnt/lustre
CMD: onyx-50vm1.onyx.whamcloud.com mkdir -p /mnt/lustre
CMD: onyx-50vm1.onyx.whamcloud.com mount -t lustre -o user_xattr,flock,test_dummy_encryption onyx-50vm4@tcp:/lustre /mnt/lustre
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
524288 bytes (524 kB, 512 KiB) copied, 0.00318379 s, 165 MB/s
rename returned -1: Invalid cross-device link
ln: failed to create hard link '/mnt/lustre/d47.sanity-sec/f47.sanity-sec' => '/mnt/lustre/junk': Invalid cross-device link
rename returned 0: Success
rename returned -1: Invalid cross-device link
 sanity-sec test_47: @@@@@@ FAIL: rename from encrypted to unencrypted dir should succeed 

VVVVVVV DO NOT REMOVE LINES BELOW, Added by Maloo for auto-association VVVVVVV
sanity-sec test_47 - rename from encrypted to unencrypted dir should succeed

Issue Links

• is related to: LU-15922 Interop: sanity-sec test_46: File nam...

Comments

[Andreas Dilger]

Looks like it needs to be skipped for old servers?

[Sebastien Buisson]

I think it can be marked as a duplicate of LU-15922, as both problems have the same origin: a lack of connection flag to handle compat with older servers that do not support name encryption.