qa: switch to use the merge fragment for fscrypt #50728

lxbsz · 2023-03-29T05:10:48Z

PR #48183 have add the merge fragment support. This will switch to use fragment to simplify the code.

Contribution Guidelines

To sign and title your commits, please refer to Submitting Patches to Ceph.
If you are submitting a fix for a stable branch (e.g. "pacific"), please refer to Submitting Patches to Ceph - Backports for the proper workflow.

Checklist

Tracker (select at least one)
- References tracker ticket
- Very recent bug; references commit where it was introduced
- New feature (ticket optional)
- Doc update (no ticket needed)
- Code cleanup (no ticket needed)
Component impact
- Affects Dashboard, opened tracker ticket
- Affects Orchestrator, opened tracker ticket
- No impact that needs to be tracked
Documentation (select at least one)
- Updates relevant documentation
- No doc update is appropriate
Tests (select at least one)
- Includes unit test(s)
- Includes integration test(s)
- Includes bug reproducer
- No tests

Show available Jenkins commands

jenkins retest this please
jenkins test classic perf
jenkins test crimson perf
jenkins test signed
jenkins test make check
jenkins test make check arm64
jenkins test submodules
jenkins test dashboard
jenkins test dashboard cephadm
jenkins test api
jenkins test docs
jenkins render docs
jenkins test ceph-volume all
jenkins test ceph-volume tox
jenkins test windows

lxbsz · 2023-03-29T05:18:32Z

All the fscrypt qa tests are running.

Will use the postmerge fragment to check this. Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/59195 Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>

Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/59195 Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>

Currently only the upstream kclient supports fscrypt feature. Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/59195 Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>

lxbsz · 2023-03-29T07:05:31Z

Only updated the commit comments.

dparmar18 · 2023-03-29T07:15:00Z

qa/suites/fs/fscrypt/tasks/0-client.yaml

+    # Once can we make sure the distro kernels have included the fscrypt feature
+    # or the ceph-fuse have supported the fscrypt feature we can remove this
+    # restriction.


we will have to keep track on this right whether and when this feature is added to distro kernels and/or ceph-fuse?

I added this comment just as Patrick mentioned in the previous PR, just to make it clear why we add this restriction here and in which case we can remove it. But couldn't foresee when.

right, i mean once the distro kernels/ceph-fuse are capable of fscrypt then we need to change it here and also here https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/48183/files#diff-63be9c532a24d81b6391bb01e3d994eef8eb6a948154c227164063e6acd592f7R3-R7. So it would be better that we note it down somewhere, or better way is to link these two in the fscrypt feature PR

I just linked this to the fscrypt feature PR #50728. Thanks.

dparmar18 · 2023-03-29T10:18:07Z

there's one job running close to 5 hours - https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-03-29_05:17:18-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-20230316-2212-unlink-revert-distro-default-smithi/7224905/, I see a lot of failures in generic/XXX that are not visible in other jobs.

lxbsz · 2023-03-29T10:35:51Z

there's one job running close to 5 hours - https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-03-29_05:17:18-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-20230316-2212-unlink-revert-distro-default-smithi/7224905/, I see a lot of failures in generic/XXX that are not visible in other jobs.

Yeah, I have checked it. It's because the osd6 dead for some reasons. I need to wait the job to be aborted and check the osd logs:

[ 2045.692294] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.699532] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.706782] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.714312] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.721540] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.728845] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M

lxbsz · 2023-03-29T13:26:09Z

I ran the qa tests again. This time the fscrypt-commom test failed, but it failed from:

generic/020       - output mismatch (see /tmp/tmp.jrgZljkscrxfstests-dev/results//generic/020.out.bad)
    --- tests/generic/020.out   2023-03-29 10:57:23.284330119 +0000
    +++ /tmp/tmp.jrgZljkscrxfstests-dev/results//generic/020.out.bad    2023-03-29 11:08:24.814914036 +0000
    @@ -47,9 +47,13 @@
     user.snrub="fish2\012"

     *** really long value
    -0000000 00
    -*
    -ATTRSIZE
    +attr_set: No space left on device
    +Could not set "long_attr" for <TESTFILE>
    +attr_get: No data available
    +Could not get "long_attr" for <TESTFILE>
    +0000000
    +attr_remove: No data available
    +Could not remove "long_attr" for <TESTFILE>
     *** set/get/remove really long names (expect failure)
     attr_set: Invalid argument
     Could not set "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX" for <TESTFILE>

This is because in Ubuntu it doesn't support the selinux:

2023-03-29T10:44:58.481 INFO:teuthology.run_tasks:Running task selinux...
2023-03-29T10:44:58.530 DEBUG:teuthology.task.selinux:Excluding smithi043: OS 'ubuntu' does not support SELinux
2023-03-29T10:44:58.530 DEBUG:teuthology.task.selinux:Excluding smithi161: OS 'ubuntu' does not support SELinux
2023-03-29T10:44:58.530 DEBUG:teuthology.task.selinux:Excluding smithi174: OS 'ubuntu' does not support SELinux
2023-03-29T10:44:58.531 DEBUG:teuthology.task.selinux:Getting current SELinux state
2023-03-29T10:44:58.531 DEBUG:teuthology.task.selinux:Existing SELinux modes: {}

This is a known bug, and the fixing patch has been in the xfstests-dev for-next branch.

lxbsz · 2023-03-29T13:29:09Z

there's one job running close to 5 hours - https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-03-29_05:17:18-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-20230316-2212-unlink-revert-distro-default-smithi/7224905/, I see a lot of failures in generic/XXX that are not visible in other jobs.

Yeah, I have checked it. It's because the osd6 dead for some reasons. I need to wait the job to be aborted and check the osd logs:
[ 2045.692294] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.699532] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.706782] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.714312] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.721540] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.728845] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M

This is the same issue with #50728 (comment).

rishabh-d-dave

LGTM. I'll this a second look and approve if after some time.

dparmar18 · 2023-03-30T12:54:29Z

there's one job running close to 5 hours - https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-03-29_05:17:18-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-20230316-2212-unlink-revert-distro-default-smithi/7224905/, I see a lot of failures in generic/XXX that are not visible in other jobs.

Yeah, I have checked it. It's because the osd6 dead for some reasons. I need to wait the job to be aborted and check the osd logs:
[ 2045.692294] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.699532] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.706782] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.714312] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.721540] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.728845] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
This is the same issue with #50728 (comment).

okay so once your fix has been merged, it should go fine right

lxbsz · 2023-03-30T12:59:27Z

there's one job running close to 5 hours - https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-03-29_05:17:18-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-20230316-2212-unlink-revert-distro-default-smithi/7224905/, I see a lot of failures in generic/XXX that are not visible in other jobs.

Yeah, I have checked it. It's because the osd6 dead for some reasons. I need to wait the job to be aborted and check the osd logs:
[ 2045.692294] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.699532] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.706782] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.714312] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.721540] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.728845] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
This is the same issue with #50728 (comment).
okay so once your fix has been merged, it should go fine right

Yeah, once that fix is applied to the xfstests-dev repo's master branch it will be fetched to git.ceph.com and then this test failure will disappear.

lxbsz · 2023-03-30T13:01:08Z

there's one job running close to 5 hours - https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-03-29_05:17:18-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-20230316-2212-unlink-revert-distro-default-smithi/7224905/, I see a lot of failures in generic/XXX that are not visible in other jobs.

Yeah, I have checked it. It's because the osd6 dead for some reasons. I need to wait the job to be aborted and check the osd logs:
[ 2045.692294] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.699532] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.706782] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.714312] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.721540] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.728845] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
This is the same issue with #50728 (comment).
okay so once your fix has been merged, it should go fine right
Yeah, once that fix is applied to the xfstests-dev repo's master branch it will be fetched to git.ceph.com and then this test failure will disappear.

Or if the job is scheduled with the rhel/Centos OS the test will pass too. Only will it fail in Ubuntu.

dparmar18 · 2023-03-30T13:12:04Z

there's one job running close to 5 hours - https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-03-29_05:17:18-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-20230316-2212-unlink-revert-distro-default-smithi/7224905/, I see a lot of failures in generic/XXX that are not visible in other jobs.

Yeah, I have checked it. It's because the osd6 dead for some reasons. I need to wait the job to be aborted and check the osd logs:
[ 2045.692294] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.699532] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.706782] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.714312] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.721540] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
[ 2045.728845] libceph: osd6 (1)172.21.15.181:6825 socket error on read^M
This is the same issue with #50728 (comment).
okay so once your fix has been merged, it should go fine right
Yeah, once that fix is applied to the xfstests-dev repo's master branch it will be fetched to git.ceph.com and then this test failure will disappear.
Or if the job is scheduled with the rhel/Centos OS the test will pass too. Only will it fail in Ubuntu.

okay but when running full suite, it will show failures for Ubuntu, so is it feasible to merge this or wait till your fix is merged in xfstests-dev master repo? BTW the changes look good

lxbsz · 2023-03-31T00:55:08Z

[...]

Or if the job is scheduled with the rhel/Centos OS the test will pass too. Only will it fail in Ubuntu.

okay but when running full suite, it will show failures for Ubuntu, so is it feasible to merge this or wait till your fix is merged in xfstests-dev master repo? BTW the changes look good

This failure is not related to this PR.

dparmar18 · 2023-03-31T05:05:03Z

[...]

Or if the job is scheduled with the rhel/Centos OS the test will pass too. Only will it fail in Ubuntu.

okay but when running full suite, it will show failures for Ubuntu, so is it feasible to merge this or wait till your fix is merged in xfstests-dev master repo? BTW the changes look good

This failure is not related to this PR.

right, i was just concerned if merging patch that fail even if not related should be done straightway(if the code looks good) or wait until the unrelated issue is patched, but anyways changes look good to me

rishabh-d-dave · 2023-03-31T19:08:49Z

@lxbsz This is ready for QA, should I pick it up?

lxbsz · 2023-04-03T01:27:22Z

@lxbsz This is ready for QA, should I pick it up?

Sure, please. Thanks.

lxbsz · 2023-05-15T01:28:15Z

@lxbsz This is ready for QA, should I pick it up?

Sure, please. Thanks.

@rishabh-d-dave BTW, What's the status for the tests ? The xfstests-dev fixing have been applied already. Thanks

lxbsz · 2023-05-15T01:28:47Z

jenkins test make check arm64

lxbsz · 2023-05-15T01:32:21Z

I will run all the relevant tests myself today.

rishabh-d-dave · 2023-05-15T10:00:55Z

@lxbsz This is ready for QA, should I pick it up?

Sure, please. Thanks.

@rishabh-d-dave BTW, What's the status for the tests ? The xfstests-dev fixing have been applied already. Thanks

I initiated testing a couple of times but there were lots of infra-related failures in both runs. I'll initiate it a third time today.

lxbsz · 2023-05-15T12:33:19Z

@lxbsz This is ready for QA, should I pick it up?

Sure, please. Thanks.

@rishabh-d-dave BTW, What's the status for the tests ? The xfstests-dev fixing have been applied already. Thanks

I initiated testing a couple of times but there were lots of infra-related failures in both runs. I'll initiate it a third time today.

Sure, thanks.

lxbsz · 2023-06-12T05:18:58Z

@rishabh-d-dave @mchangir

I have run the and passed:

https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-06-09_04:16:04-fs:functional-wip-lxb-fscrypt-20230607-0901-distro-default-smithi/
https://pulpito.ceph.com/xiubli-2023-06-09_03:59:14-fs:fscrypt-wip-lxb-fscrypt-20230607-0901-distro-default-smithi/

If no objection I will merge this and the kclient fscrypt patches need to run these tests, we need to push the kclient fscrypt patches further.

Thanks

mchangir

LGTM

lxbsz · 2023-06-12T23:38:27Z

Talked with @rishabh-d-dave, this is fine with him. Since we need to push the fscrypt patches in kclient and the tests passed. Merge it. Thanks!

lxbsz added the needs-qa label Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz requested a review from a team March 29, 2023 05:10

github-actions bot added cephfs Ceph File System tests labels Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz force-pushed the wip-59195 branch from aebf911 to 79034bb Compare March 29, 2023 05:15

lxbsz added 3 commits March 29, 2023 15:04

qa: remove the FuseMount/KernelMount check in test_fscrypt.py

f52f131

Will use the postmerge fragment to check this. Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/59195 Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>

qa: switch to use .qa/cephfs/mount/ instead

e7272e7

Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/59195 Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>

qa: switch to use the merge fragment for fscrypt

04fab9b

Currently only the upstream kclient supports fscrypt feature. Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/59195 Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>

lxbsz force-pushed the wip-59195 branch from 79034bb to 04fab9b Compare March 29, 2023 07:05

dparmar18 reviewed Mar 29, 2023

View reviewed changes

lxbsz mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2023

qa: cephfs add fscrypt test suite support for kclient #48628

Merged

14 tasks

lxbsz requested a review from rishabh-d-dave March 29, 2023 13:33

rishabh-d-dave reviewed Mar 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

rishabh-d-dave approved these changes Mar 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

dparmar18 approved these changes Mar 31, 2023

View reviewed changes

rishabh-d-dave added the wip-rishabh-testing Rishabh's testing label label Apr 4, 2023

lxbsz added the wip-lxb-testing label May 15, 2023

lxbsz removed the wip-lxb-testing label May 15, 2023

lxbsz added the wip-lxb-testing label Jun 6, 2023

mchangir approved these changes Jun 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

lxbsz merged commit 4a60f67 into ceph:main Jun 12, 2023
4 checks passed

lxbsz mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2024

reef: qa: switch to use the merge fragment for fscrypt #55857

Open

14 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

qa: switch to use the merge fragment for fscrypt #50728

qa: switch to use the merge fragment for fscrypt #50728

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

dparmar18 Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz Mar 29, 2023 •

edited

dparmar18 Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz Mar 29, 2023

dparmar18 commented Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023 •

edited

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023 •

edited

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

rishabh-d-dave left a comment

dparmar18 commented Mar 30, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 30, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 30, 2023

dparmar18 commented Mar 30, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 31, 2023

dparmar18 commented Mar 31, 2023

rishabh-d-dave commented Mar 31, 2023

lxbsz commented Apr 3, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

rishabh-d-dave commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented Jun 12, 2023

mchangir left a comment

lxbsz commented Jun 12, 2023

qa: switch to use the merge fragment for fscrypt #50728

qa: switch to use the merge fragment for fscrypt #50728

Conversation

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

Contribution Guidelines

Checklist

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

dparmar18 Mar 29, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lxbsz Mar 29, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dparmar18 Mar 29, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lxbsz Mar 29, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dparmar18 commented Mar 29, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023 • edited

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023 • edited

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023

rishabh-d-dave left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dparmar18 commented Mar 30, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 30, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 30, 2023

dparmar18 commented Mar 30, 2023

lxbsz commented Mar 31, 2023

dparmar18 commented Mar 31, 2023

rishabh-d-dave commented Mar 31, 2023

lxbsz commented Apr 3, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

rishabh-d-dave commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented May 15, 2023

lxbsz commented Jun 12, 2023

mchangir left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lxbsz commented Jun 12, 2023

lxbsz Mar 29, 2023 •

edited

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023 •

edited

lxbsz commented Mar 29, 2023 •

edited