Re: fs/tmpfs/t_vnd/basic fails

[SAITOH Masanobu <msaitoh%execsw.org@localhost>]

(2012/09/08 13:38), Paul Goyette wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2012, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> 
>> msaitoh@ wrote:
>>
>>> The error message of "error = 16" is printed from dev/dkwedge/dk.c.
>> :
>>> NetBSD five.execsw.org 6.99.11 NetBSD 6.99.11 (MONOLITHIC) #43:
>>
>> What happens with GENERIC (i.e. with options MODULAR)?
> 
> Just as a side note, while this behaviour is odd, the test itself appears to 
> expect this behaviour - the ATF framework reports a status of Passed.
> 
>     ...
>     fs/tmpfs/t_vnd (144/529): 1 test cases
>         basic: vnd3: unable to open device, error = 16
>     [13.998250s] Passed.
>     [14.009220s]
>     ...

 Thanks. As you wrote, the test "passed" on i386 (bot GENERIC and MONOLOTHIC).

The diffecence between i386 and evbarm is about newfs:

> # dd if=/dev/zero of=disk.img bs=1m count=10
> 10+0 records in
> 10+0 records out
> 10485760 bytes transferred in 0.185 secs (56679783 bytes/sec)
> # vnconfig /dev/vnd3 disk.img
> vnd3: unable to open device, error = 16
> # newfs /dev/rvnd3a
> newfs: /dev/rvnd3a: open for read: Device not configured

 It seems it's evbarm specific bug..........


> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Paul Goyette     | PGP Key fingerprint:     | E-mail addresses:       |
> | Customer Service | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee.com    |
> | Network Engineer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at juniper.net |
> | Kernel Developer |                          | pgoyette at netbsd.org  |
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
-----------------------------------------------
                SAITOH Masanobu (msaitoh%execsw.org@localhost
                                 msaitoh%netbsd.org@localhost)