[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: qemu iotest 161 and make check

From: Li Zhang
Subject: Re: qemu iotest 161 and make check
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 11:59:16 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0

On 3/31/22 09:44, Christian Borntraeger wrote:

Am 21.02.22 um 11:27 schrieb Christian Borntraeger:

Am 10.02.22 um 18:44 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
10.02.2022 20:13, Thomas Huth wrote:
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:

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

FWIW, qemu_lock_fd_test returns -11 (EAGAIN)
and raw_check_lock_bytes spits this error.

I also run into this issue on S390 when running test cases.
I think it will report this "write" lock error if different processes are using the same image.

Is this just some overload situation that we do not recover because we do not handle EAGAIN any special.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]