[TESTBUG] runtime/containers/docker/TestCPUAwareness.java failed in docker not supporting --cpus

Bob Vandette bob.vandette at oracle.com
Thu Jan 31 16:30:23 UTC 2019


I’m not a “R” reviewer but I’m ok with your change.

Bob.


> On Jan 31, 2019, at 11:00 AM, Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> wrote:
> 
> I leave the change, and update copyright year:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aoqi/8217597/webrev.02/ Could you help to
> review this?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ao Qi
> 
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:08 PM Bob Vandette <bob.vandette at oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, that does provide a bit more unique testing so leave the change as you had it.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Bob.
>> 
>>> On Jan 28, 2019, at 8:41 PM, Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Bob,
>>> 
>>> Thanks! I am not a containers expert and have one small question. The
>>> maximum amount of --cpus is 4 (equivalent to both setting —cpu-period
>>> and —cpu-quota) in the already existing test. Is it valuable to keep
>>> testCpus(i, i) according to the max num of available CPUs? If not, I
>>> would also prefer removing the lines. In addition, I think I forgot to
>>> update the copyright year, it will be fixed in the next version of
>>> wevrev.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 11:35 PM Bob Vandette <bob.vandette at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> There is already a test that verifies —cpu-period and —cpu-quota.
>>>> I would just remove these lines.
>>>> 
>>>> 62             // leave one CPU for system and tools, otherwise this test may be unstable
>>>> 63             int maxNrOfAvailableCpus =  availableCPUs - 1;
>>>> 64             for (int i=1; i < maxNrOfAvailableCpus; i = i * 2) {
>>>> 65                 testCpus(i, i);
>>>> 66             }
>>>> 
>>>> 129     private static void testCpus(int valueToSet, int expectedTraceValue) throws Exception {
>>>> 130         Common.logNewTestCase("test cpus: " + valueToSet);
>>>> 131         DockerRunOptions opts = Common.newOpts(imageName)
>>>> 132             .addDockerOpts("--cpus", "" + valueToSet);
>>>> 133         Common.run(opts)
>>>> 134             .shouldMatch("active_processor_count.*" + expectedTraceValue);
>>>> 135     }
>>>> 
>>>> Bob.
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 28, 2019, at 10:22 AM, Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Since —cpus is a shortcut for of setting both --cpu-period and
>>>> --cpu-quota and the test is not intended to verify that docker works
>>>> correctly, I did not check the docker version and just replaced
>>>> setting --cpus with setting both --cpu-period and --cpu-quota. What do
>>>> you think of this patch:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aoqi/8217597/webrev.01/ ?
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ao Qi
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 11:37 PM Bob Vandette <bob.vandette at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Since —cpus is just a shortcut for of setting both --cpu-period and --cpu-quota”, I’d
>>>> be ok with removing this test.  The tests are intended to test the container/cgroup
>>>> configuration detection logic and not to verify that docker works correctly.
>>>> 
>>>> An alternate solution would be to add version detection to the Docker test check in
>>>> DockerTestUtils.java .   We already exec “docker ps” to see if docker is available
>>>> and enabled.
>>>> 
>>>> % docker --version
>>>> Docker version 17.03.1-ce, build 276fd32
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Bob.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 22, 2019, at 10:19 PM, Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:55 AM David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 23/01/2019 11:58 am, Ao Qi wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi David,
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 5:24 AM David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> cc'ing Bob as our containers expert ...
>>>> 
>>>> On 23/01/2019 1:10 am, Ao Qi wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> --cpus is available in Docker 1.13 and higher [1], so
>>>> runtime/containers/docker/TestCPUAwareness.java failed in docker which
>>>> does not support --cpus.
>>>> 
>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aoqi/docker/webrev.00/
>>>> 
>>>> This patch skips the test if --cpus is not supported. I tested
>>>> runtime/containers/docker/TestCPUAwareness.java on a Fedora 25 (Docker
>>>> version 1.12.6, build ae7d637/1.12.6, not supporting --cpus) and
>>>> Ubuntu 16.04 (Docker version 17.03.2-ce, build f5ec1e2, supporting
>>>> --cpus)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The patch causes the test to pass if launching Docker fails for any
>>>> reason so that is not good.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I tested two versions of docker which does not support --cpus. Their
>>>> exit values when using --cpus are 2 and 125, and outputs are:
>>>> 
>>>> flag provided but not defined: --cpus
>>>> See 'docker run --help'.
>>>> 
>>>> and
>>>> 
>>>> unknown flag: --cpus
>>>> See 'docker run --help'.
>>>> 
>>>> My initial thought was that the else condition of
>>>> "output.getExitValue() == 0" should match the condition of "--cpus not
>>>> supported". Firstly I used output.shouldMatch("docker run --help"),
>>>> but I am not sure if all the docker version behaves this way when
>>>> --cpus is not supported and "docker run --help" does not certainly
>>>> indicate "--cpus not supported", so I removed the else condition.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I think we need to try and find a way to clearly identifyt eh failing
>>>> condition. Is there are "docker --version" we coudl check?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I will do more research. Checking docker version may be one option,
>>>> and checking whether one option is support by docker may be also one
>>>> option. I will try them later, while waiting if there are some other
>>>> opinions :)
>>>> 
>>>> I am not sure if this is a testbug, so I did not file it on JBS. In
>>>> fact, I am not quite sure what kind of issue can be filed on JBS. Is
>>>> there any guidance document?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Any/all issues can be filed on JBS. You don't need to pre-classify as a
>>>> testbug, simple create an issue that a test is failing under specific
>>>> conditions. Whomever works on the bug will then determine whether it is
>>>> a testbug or product issue or something else. (We don't seem to have any
>>>> docs on using JBS ...)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> What if the issue is not a bug or no body cares the issue? The issue
>>>> will be open on JBS forever?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Possibly :) But each component team performs regular triage of the bugs
>>>> that get filed and eventually things will be examined enough to see if
>>>> they are indeed a bug, and if not they will be closed as not an issue.
>>>> If a bug but low priority it may eventually get closed as "will not fix"
>>>> just to keep the open bug count down.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I was a little afraid that filing issues that are not bugs or nobody
>>>> cares would increase the workload of others and frustrate myself, so I
>>>> was not sure what kind of issue should be filed. Now I basically
>>>> clear, thanks David.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> David
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for your explanation, and I filed this issue on JBS:
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217597
>>>> 
>>>> In this case I'm not sure whether we require a docker version that
>>>> supports --cpus, and the test should be skipped otherwise. Though
>>>> ideally this would involve an explicit version check so we don't just
>>>> pass if the docker process fails.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ao Qi
>>>> 
>>>> [1] https://docs.docker.com/config/containers/resource_constraints/#cpu
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 



More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev mailing list