On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Abhishek wrote: > On 2017-09-25 19:33, Patrick Donnelly wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Sage Weil <sweil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Abhishek wrote: > > > > On 2017-09-25 11:43, Abhishek wrote: > > > > > On 2017-09-25 03:08, Yan, Zheng wrote: > > > > > > On 2017/9/24 22:03, Abhishek wrote: > > > > > > > On 2017-09-19 23:11, Patrick Donnelly wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Yuri Weinstein > > > > <yweinste@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > kcephfs - needs analysis - Patrick, Zheng FYI > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/21463 > > > > > > > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/21462 > > > > > > > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/21466 > > > > > > > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/21467 > > > > > > > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/21468 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Last 3 look like blockers. Zheng will have more input. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here are the results of a rerun with -k testing, > > > > > > > > > > > http://pulpito.ceph.com/abhi-2017-09-22_19:35:04-kcephfs-luminous-testing-basic-smithi/ > > > > > > > & details http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/21296#note-20 > > > > > > > There are a few failures which look environmental but a few look > > > > like > > > > > > > they are related to the changeset (the ones with cache) > > > > > > > > > > > > > "MDS cache is too large" issue should be fixed by > > > > > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/17922 > > > > > Ah alright this is a qa suite fix, we can run a the suite with a qa > > > > > suite argument just to be sure. > > > > > > > > alternatively we can just merge this in luminous branch and this gets > > > > tested > > > > in the final qe run anyway, since we may have to do that since there are > > > > some > > > > rados and cephfs changes? > > > > > > Yes, let's do that. > > > > > > I think all of the other blockers are resolved now? > > > > These whitelist QA fixes would be good to merge to silence spurious > > failures for QE: > > > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/17945 > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/17821 > > About QE validation, my vote is to just go through cephfs & rados suites as we > have a rados and a few (mostly qe related) cephfs prs that went in. > > Sage/Yuri/Patrick thoughts? Yuri scheduled them last night and they look good (rados was all green :). I think we're good to go! sage -- 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
