Hi, sorry if I misunderstood, I waited for more input regarding what areas have to be tested here. On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Martin Polednik <mpolednik@redhat.com> wrote:
On 11/04/18 16:52 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote:
We can test this on iSCSI, NFS and GlusterFS. As for ceph and cinder, will have to check, since usually, we don't execute our automation on them.
Any update on this? I believe the gluster tests were successful, OST passes fine and unit tests pass fine, that makes the storage backends test the last required piece.
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Raz Tamir <ratamir@redhat.com> wrote:
+Elad
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Nir Soffer <nsoffer@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:31 PM Eyal Edri <eedri@redhat.com> wrote:
Please make sure to run as much OST suites on this patch as possible
before merging ( using 'ci please build' )
But note that OST is not a way to verify the patch.
Such changes require testing with all storage types we support.
Nir
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Martin Polednik <mpolednik@redhat.com
wrote:
Hey, > > I've created a patch[0] that is finally able to activate libvirt's > dynamic_ownership for VDSM while not negatively affecting > functionality of our storage code. > > That of course comes with quite a bit of code removal, mostly in the > area of host devices, hwrng and anything that touches devices; bunch > of test changes and one XML generation caveat (storage is handled by > VDSM, therefore disk relabelling needs to be disabled on the VDSM > level). > > Because of the scope of the patch, I welcome storage/virt/network > people to review the code and consider the implication this change > has > on current/future features. > > [0] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/89830/ > > In particular: dynamic_ownership was set to 0 prehistorically (as
part of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554961 ) because libvirt, running as root, was not able to play properly with root-squash nfs mounts.
Have you attempted this use case?
I join to Nir's request to run this with storage QE.
--
Raz Tamir Manager, RHV QE