CephFS and the next firefly release

CephFS and the next firefly release

[Loic Dachary]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 476 bytes --]

Hi Greg,

The fs teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back with three failures : http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10641#fs. Do you think it is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?

Cheers

P.S. I'll include the fs suite as part of the pre-QE round of testing from now on, unless you think it is redundant or not useful.

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre






[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: CephFS and the next firefly release

[Gregory Farnum]

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> The fs teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back with three failures : http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10641#fs. Do you think it is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>
> Cheers
>
> P.S. I'll include the fs suite as part of the pre-QE round of testing from now on, unless you think it is redundant or not useful.

It'd be nice to see those tests run on a new enough kernel that they
pass, but yes; should be good!
-Greg

Re: CephFS and the next firefly release

[Loic Dachary]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1031 bytes --]

Hi Greg,

On 01/03/2015 06:00, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> The fs teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back with three failures : http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10641#fs. Do you think it is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> P.S. I'll include the fs suite as part of the pre-QE round of testing from now on, unless you think it is redundant or not useful.
> 
> It'd be nice to see those tests run on a new enough kernel that they
> pass, 

Is there an open issue for this or should I create one ?

> but yes; should be good!

Cool.

Cheers
> -Greg
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: CephFS and the next firefly release

[Gregory Farnum]

On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On 01/03/2015 06:00, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Greg,
>>>
>>> The fs teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back with three failures : http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10641#fs. Do you think it is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> P.S. I'll include the fs suite as part of the pre-QE round of testing from now on, unless you think it is redundant or not useful.
>>
>> It'd be nice to see those tests run on a new enough kernel that they
>> pass,
>
> Is there an open issue for this or should I create one ?

Not to do it automatically, no. That's made difficult since it just
runs as part of the generic workunits (which otherwise don't need a
kernel of any particular kind) and we actually want to run across a
variety of kernels to detect other bugs.
-Greg