[LTP] ltp build broken on Fedora 40?

[Li Wang]

On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 5:24 AM Chuck Lever III via ltp
<ltp@lists.linux.it> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 29, 2024, at 4:50 PM, Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>> On Aug 28, 2024, at 6:48 PM, Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> >
> >>> Hi Chuck,
> >
> >>>> Hi-
> >
> >>>> I'm finding that ltp 20240524 does not build on Fedora 40 due
> >>>> to a missing header:
> >
> >>> I guess you need to backport gcc-14 fix b0ae1ee239 ("rpc_svc_1: Fix incompatible
> >>> pointer type error") [1] (or build with older gcc).
> >
> >>>> ltp/testcases/kernel/device-drivers/tbio/tbio_kernel/ltp_tbio.c:46:10: fatal error: linux/genhd.h: No such file or directory
> >>>>  46 | #include <linux/genhd.h>
> >>>>     |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>> compilation terminated.
> >
> >> Building ltp on commit b0ae1ee239 indeed fixed the problem on Fedora 40.
> >> I guess the "genhd.h" error misdirected me. Thanks, Petr!
> >
> > You're welcome (we appreciate when kernel maintainers look into LTP),
> > feel free to ask if you encounter more problems.
> >
> > I would say mostly the current master branch is the best LTP, I would fallback
> > to the latest stable release only when master does not build.
>
> I think in general we stick with a fixed version of tests
> so that they are repeatable and don't change because the
> tests have unexpectedly changed rather than due to actual
> source code breakage.

Yes, but Fedora40 was released later than ltp-20240524, that's the
reason the stable LTP you used does not cover the compile failure.

We don't have a dedicated person to maintain stable test versions,
we just do a wide pre-release test for LTP (before release) against
most Linux distributions.

So find the latest branch of LTP general contains the newest changes/fixes.

>
> Updating the test version is therefore a manual step, but
> that means there's a bright line (a commit message and some
> test results that show the new tests don't introduce
> anything unexpected).
>
> It won't be difficult to pull b0ae1ee239 just for my
> Fedora 40 systems until there is a tagged release of ltp
> with this fix baked in. (As you noticed, I am regularly
> testing the LTS kernels too, and those run older Fedora
> releases which use an older version of gcc).
>
>
> > Also, in your case, for NFS testing you need just to compile
> > testcases/network/nfs{,v4} directories and their dependencies
> > (testcases/lib/ testcases/network/netstress/).
>
> Just to avoid being mysterious about it....
>
> I have integrated ltp into kdevops [1] as its own workflow,
> with several separately-enabled test groups, including NFS,
> RPC, fanotify, and fs.
>
> The kdevops workflow typically builds and installs the whole
> suite in each test guest, to keep the automation simple;
> then Ansible is used to start the particular set of tests
> that we want to run in that test group. (We could trim down
> the builds, though!)
>
> The point of kdevops is to be a Swiss Army knife for automated
> file system testing; these workflows (including ltp) can run
> for several other file system types in the kernel aside from
> NFS (today, that's xfs, ext4, btrfs, and tmpfs).
>
> So, correct, I am using it for upstream NFS testing, but the
> kdevops workflow I built is supposed to be more generically
> useful.
>
> Input is welcome here; the ltp workflow is pretty fresh, so
> not everything is working 100% smoothly yet. It would be
> pretty easy to add more test groups if you think a
> particular test might be valuable for the Linux file system
> community, for example.
>
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
> [1] https://github.com/linux-kdevops/kdevops
>
> --
> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp



-- 
Regards,
Li Wang