Details
-
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Minor
-
Lustre 2.11.0
-
3
-
9223372036854775807
Description
sanity test_160g - User cl8 still found in changelog_users
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ DO NOT REMOVE LINE ABOVE ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This issue was created by maloo for Bob Glossman <bob.glossman@intel.com>
This issue relates to the following test suite run:
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/5a8495f4-1bfa-11e8-a6ad-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/34e243bc-1be3-11e8-a7cd-52540065bddc
test_160g failed with the following error:
User cl8 still found in changelog_users
This may be a dup of LU-9624
I can't tell if it is so I am raising a fresh ticket.
Will let somebody else decide if it's a dup or not.
Attachments
Issue Links
Activity
Note also that with patch https://review.whamcloud.com/31552 "LU-10680 mdd: disable changelog garbage collection by default" test_160f and test_160g need to be modified to set changelog_gc=1 at the start of each test, and remove the tests from ALWAYS_EXCEPT so that the tests will run properly.
It looks like this failure relates to the landing of patch https://review.whamcloud.com/27535 "LU-9624 tests: fix pre-DNE test exceptions/llog usage". It didn't fail during normal testing, but I guess SLES is not part of regular testing.
Having a better look to the recent changes that may have introduced this regression, I think that "a37134d LU-9624 tests: fix pre-DNE test exceptions/llog usage" could better be the cause of it.
Hope to get more about this soon now.
+1 on master, all with DNE
testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sessions/7a5adbc7-2d4b-425a-9e71-a4674823a0df
testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sessions/a9ae8e29-d45d-49b6-a639-a6fba84f5dfc
here is a similar fail seen on el7, not on SLES at all.
proof this problem isn't SLES only.
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/b3cb95da-20dd-11e8-a4b1-52540065bddc
after many similar fails here is a SLES test run that did NOT hit the failure:
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sessions/ba2847b6-e445-448d-882d-356fca02b96e
Don't know what the diff is between runs that fail and those that don't.
Noting this instance that didn't fail in the hope that it may be of some use.
more on master:
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/f9311b56-209a-11e8-a4b1-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/c68848ae-20b4-11e8-9ec4-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/50a68744-20d3-11e8-a6ca-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/9d2125f0-2157-11e8-9ec4-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/bbef9e12-2184-11e8-9ec4-52540065bddc
Well, it is strange that it seems to only fail running with SLES, and looks like it started to fail after my 1st patch for LU-10680 (https://review.whamcloud.com/31347/) has landed, when it should fix an issue with my previous patch for LU-7340 which has introduced sanity/test_160[f,g] tests !!... I think I need to reproduce and debug it this way.
These fails only seen on master. Probably because sanity, 160g only exists on master.
more on master:
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/9ac85f8a-1cac-11e8-a7cd-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/e7203b64-1cac-11e8-a7cd-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/dc78ca60-1cba-11e8-a6ad-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/27be5f90-1cc9-11e8-bd00-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/1645ec0c-1ccd-11e8-a7cd-52540065bddc
https://testing.hpdd.intel.com/test_sets/fc6956e8-1d62-11e8-a10a-52540065bddc
> It didn't fail during normal testing, but I guess SLES is not part of regular testing.
Well, it is tested regularly, but due to the round robin system used for pre-landing review test runs, it is not guaranteed to run before everything lands unless people proactively request this with test parameters.