Abhishek L writes: > Sage Weil writes: > >> On Wed, 30 Nov 2016, Abhishek L wrote: >>> >>> Abhishek L writes: >>> >>> > Sage Weil writes: >>> > >>> >> On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Abhishek L wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Sage, Greg, >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Yuri Weinstein writes: >>> >>> >>> >>> > See updated status - http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17487#note-32 >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Outstanding issues: >>> >>> > >>> >>> > knfs - http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16397 (same as in v10.2.3, Greg >>> >>> > pls review/approve, assumed Approved ?) >>> >>> > >>> >>> > upgrade/hammer-x (jewel) - http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17847 ((Sage >>> >>> > pls review/approve, seems persistent, but maybe not a showstopper) >>> >>> > >>> >>> > upgrade/infernalis-x (jewel) - deprecated (Nathan is still working >>> >>> > to make it pass, see issues in the tacker summary above) >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Sage, jewel 10.2.4 can be released as soon as you agree with the >>> >>> > findings/summary. >>> >>> >>> >>> Do you think we're ready to release 10.2.4 yet? >>> >> >>> >> I'm reproducing http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17847 with logs to make >>> >> sure this isn't a regression. >>> >> >>> >> We can ignore the infernalis runs. >>> >> >>> >> I think we can ignore the knfs selinux issue too.. Greg, can you confirm? >>> >> >>> > Added the prs 12001 & 12167 on top of the jewel branch and scheduled rados runs >>> > at >>> > http://pulpito.ceph.com/abhi-2016-11-29_10:22:25-rados-wip-jewel-10-2-4-distro-basic-smithi/ & >> >> https://github.com/ceph/ceph-qa-suite/pull/1292 >> >> avoids xenial for the rados upgrade tests (in jewel branch). Ah alright, maybe this was the cause after all, let's get this in (or push a branch to ceph-qa-suite so that I can schedule against that) >> >> The upgrade tests already explicitly call out trusty, so they should be >> fine. >> >>> > updated the tracker at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17851#note-17, >>> > with details of the test. I'll update the progress once the suite goes >>> > through >>> >>> Had around 11 tests fail from 296 scheduled, there were a couple of >>> valgrind issues on ceph-mon (which were seen at earlier runs on jewel as >>> well) and an s3test failure, rest of the issues were looking related to >>> infrastructure as they were failing to get specific version numbers from >>> gitbuilders. >>> >>> Reported this issue as: >>> >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/18089 >>> >>> subsequent re runs are still failing with similar errors. The details >>> are updated at >>> >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17487#note-37 >>> >>> The upgrade suite has also failed with similar errors. >> >> Which one? > The upgrade/client-upgrade suite (I hope this is the right upgrade > suite), the errors are the same failed to fetch package version errors > seen for the rados suite, so not actual test run errors yet. > > http://pulpito.ceph.com/abhi-2016-11-30_09:58:50-upgrade:client-upgrade-wip-jewel-10-2-4-distro-basic-smithi/ > is the run > > Best, > Abhishek -- Abhishek Lekshmanan SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- 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
