From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751723AbaHSE37 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2014 00:29:59 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:42264 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750774AbaHSE36 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2014 00:29:58 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,891,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="578545736" Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 12:30:06 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: Jan Kara Cc: lkp@01.org, LKML Subject: [writeback] 952648324b9: xfstests.xfs.026.fail Message-ID: <20140819043006.GA11419@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Heirloom mailx 12.5 6/20/10 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Jan, We find more xfstests changes on "writeback: Per-sb dirty tracking". 008 seems improved, the others are regressions. 063 failure is not 100% reproducible. df3be46bdbab23e 952648324b969f3fc22d3a2a7 --------------- ------------------------- 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.026.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.027.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.061.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.281.fail 0 +Inf% 0 ±200% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.063.fail 0 ±489% -100.0% 0 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.008.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.056.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.059.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.060.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.266.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.282.fail 0 +Inf% 1 ± 0% TOTAL xfstests.xfs.283.fail Thanks, Fengguang