Hi Greg, On 03/02/2016 16:23, Gregory Farnum wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ). >> >> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ? > > Well, one of them looks to be an infrastructure issue of some kind. > You appear to have figured out the fsstress one > (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14584#change-65185), and the fsx one > is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport Thanks for the pointer :-) (and to Nathan for backporting). > in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working > version of the repo). Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Cheers > -Greg > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
