https://jira.whamcloud.com This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 9.4.14 940014 05-12-2023 https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-13038 Lustre <p>We need to have a sanity test that will hopefully prevent the repeated bugs that have been introduced by sysfs cleanup patches that result in config parameters being removed or renamed, a few of which have unfortunately made it into releases before they are caught. </p> <p>The test should run "<tt>lctl list_param -R</tt>" on each of the client, mgs, mds1, and ost1 facets, strip out the fsname and OST/MDT/instance index unique values, "<tt>sort -u</tt>" the list so that it doesn't matter how many OSTs/MDTs there are, then compare it against a canonical list of parameters. It should be OK to have additional parameters (mostly this will happen if eg. both an MDT and OST are on the same node), but it should be a test failure if any parameters are removed (which will also catchy parameters that are renamed).</p> LU-13038

Test to verify parameters are not removed

Improvement Minor Open Unresolved WC Triage Andreas Dilger Sat, 30 Nov 2019 17:04:55 +0000 Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:14:29 +0000 0 3 <p>This is a good idea. Its not just issues with naming but times when similar functionality is duplicated elsewhere that the new name doesn't sync with the older names which causes problems. We saw that with the qos_threshold_rr work. For the linux client at one time we had a sysfs-fs-lustre that listed the sysfs files we had as well as document what they did. Perhaps we could add this to the OpenSFS tree. It have to be updated. This file could be used for verifying if the parameter names are right. I attached the original file but it needs an update.</p> Development Rank 1|i00q87: Rank (Obsolete) 9223372036854775807