On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 24/08/2016 22:46, Gregory Farnum wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Hi John, >>>> >>>> The next jewel release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/jewel passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16344#note-30 except for three valgrind failures). Do you think the jewel branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> P.S. CC'ing Greg because John is on vacation, in case a decision is to be made before he returns. >>> >>> Ugh, I went to check these valgrind failures and they're a failed >>> mutex assert on shutdown. Let me dig into what's happening. :( >>> -Greg >> >> Hmm, we seem to have some badly-colliding backports. If you look at >> commit ac449472df2978123192d5f22247d8b8bc5efb28 and MDSRank.cc line >> 242, you'll see it does mds_lock.Unlock() twice in quick succession. >> :( >> >> One of them came in from 7c2eab19, and the other from 1d3a8168. I >> think maybe the patches got reordered in their backport order or >> something. >> >> Patrick, can you give https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/10847 a quick >> review? Loic, can you then run the failed tests against a backport >> branch which includes that patch? > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/10847 has been pushed as part of the jewel-backports integration branch right now and I'll schedule a fs run as soon as it finishes building. Thanks for the quick fix ! Sure. Assuming that works out everything else looked good to me. :) -- 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
