Open Stack

* Shinde, Archana M (archana.m.shinde at 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 at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> >* Castelino, Manohar R (manohar.r.castelino at 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 at redhat.com / Manchester, UK
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >kata-dev mailing list
> >kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io
> >http://lists.katacontainers.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kata-dev
> 
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert at redhat.com / Manchester, UK