* Shinde, Archana M (archana.m.shinde@intel.com) wrote:
We have run the pjdfstest test suite in the past for POSIX compliance and seen quite a few failures with 9p. An old issue documenting this: https://github.com/clearcontainers/runtime/issues/828
I think the pjdfstest will be a good place to start. Graham has documented this process here: https://github.com/kata-containers/runtime/issues/279#issuecomment-39437129 9
OK, thanks; we'll try and keep an eye on those. Dave
Basically one needs to run Kata Containers with the following Dockerfile:
FROM ubuntu
RUN apt-get update && \ apt-get -y install autoconf git bc libacl1-dev libacl1 acl gcc make perl-modules && \ git clone https://github.com/pjd/pjdfstest.git && \ cd pjdfstest && \ autoreconf -ifs && \ ./configure && \ make
# and run using # prove -r .
That test suite does not include the fallocate tests. But simply running fallocate(1) in a Kata container today, fails with "Operation not supported" with 9p.
-Archana
On 9/26/18, 11:37 AM, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com> wrote:
* Castelino, Manohar R (manohar.r.castelino@intel.com) wrote:
Do we really get better POSIX compliance? From what I read I think we will still have some POSIX issues.
Which ones are you worried about?
With 9p we ran into issues with unlink, fallocate and fstat, which caused some workloads to fail with Kata.
If you've got test cases or can remember the details we'd be interested to see them.
Dave
-- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
_______________________________________________ kata-dev mailing list kata-dev@lists.katacontainers.io http://lists.katacontainers.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kata-dev
-- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK