Re: qemu iotest 161 and make check

[Thomas Huth]

On 10/02/2022 15.51, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am 10.02.22 um 15:47 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> > 10.02.2022 10:57, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I do see spurious failures of 161 in our CI, but only when I use
> > > make check with parallelism (-j).
> > > I have not yet figured out which other testcase could interfere
> > >
> > > @@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
> > >   *** Commit and then change an option on the backing file
> > >
> > >   Formatting 'TEST_DIR/t.IMGFMT.base', fmt=IMGFMT size=1048576
> > > +qemu-img: TEST_DIR/t.IMGFMT.base: Failed to get "write" lock
> > > +Is another process using the image [TEST_DIR/t.IMGFMT.base]?
> > >   Formatting 'TEST_DIR/t.IMGFMT.int', fmt=IMGFMT size=1048576 
> > > backing_file=TEST_DIR/t.IMGFMT.base backing_fmt=IMGFMT
> > >   Formatting 'TEST_DIR/t.IMGFMT', fmt=IMGFMT size=1048576 
> > > backing_file=TEST_DIR/t.IMGFMT.int backing_fmt=IMGFMT
> > >   { 'execute': 'qmp_capabilities' }
> > >
> > >
> > > any ideas?
> >
> > Hmm, interesting.. Is it always 161 and always exactly this diff?
>
> Its always 161 and only 161. I would need to check if its always the same 
> error.
>
> > First, this place in 161 is usual: we just create and image, like in many 
> > other tests.
> >
> > Second, why _make_test_img trigger "Failed to get write lock"? It should 
> > just create an image. Hmm. And probably starts QSD if protocol is fuse. 
> > So, that start of QSD may probably fail.. Is that the case? What is image 
> > format and protocol used in test run?
> >
> > But anyway, tests running in parallel should not break each other as each 
> > test has own TEST_DIR and SOCK_DIR..

Unless you run into the issue that Hanna described here:

 https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2022-02/msg01735.html

 Thomas