[lustre-devel] [testing] Maloo not scheduling tests

[lustre-devel] [testing] Maloo not scheduling tests

[quentin.bouget at cea.fr]

Hello,

It seems like Maloo is not scheduling tests for this patch 
<https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/36292/> since I added some test 
parameters yesterday:

    Test-Parameters: fortestonly testlist=sanity clientarch=ppc64

Are there problems on Maloo, or am I doing something wrong?

Quentin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-devel-lustre.org/attachments/20191016/1ebf5752/attachment.html>

[lustre-devel] [testing] Maloo not scheduling tests

[Andreas Dilger]

On Oct 16, 2019, at 19:21, quentin.bouget at cea.fr<mailto:quentin.bouget@cea.fr> wrote:


Hello,

It seems like Maloo is not scheduling tests for this patch<https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/36292/> since I added some test parameters yesterday:

Test-Parameters: fortestonly testlist=sanity clientarch=ppc64


Are there problems on Maloo, or am I doing something wrong?

The "fortestonly" keyword is for patches that are not intended for landing (e.g. work-in-progress patches for early review), so only a limited number of tests are run.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Lustre Architect
Whamcloud






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-devel-lustre.org/attachments/20191016/01635e5b/attachment.html>

[lustre-devel] [testing] Maloo not scheduling tests

[quentin.bouget at cea.fr]

On 16/10/2019 17:23, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2019, at 19:21, quentin.bouget at cea.fr 
> <mailto:quentin.bouget@cea.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> It seems like Maloo is not scheduling tests for this patch 
>> <https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/36292/> since I added some test 
>> parameters yesterday:
>>
>>     Test-Parameters: fortestonly testlist=sanity clientarch=ppc64
>>
>> Are there problems on Maloo, or am I doing something wrong?
>>
>
> The "fortestonly" keyword is for patches that are not intended for 
> landing (e.g. work-in-progress patches for early review), so only a 
> limited number of tests are run.
>
Yes, I understand this. The idea was to check that the current version 
of the patch does fail on a big-endian client. But it does not seem like 
any tests are being scheduled.

EDIT: I just checked gerrit, there must have been a temporary failure, a 
retest was requested by M. Omstead.

Thanks,
Quentin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-devel-lustre.org/attachments/20191016/bcf44174/attachment.html>

[lustre-devel] [testing] Maloo not scheduling tests

[James Nunez]

Quentin,

I just checked your patch and the PPC client test session did run; see https://testing.whamcloud.com/test_sessions/6478c83d-a8a5-4d18-8eb6-2242e7590535.

I'm guessing that there may be some confusion on the different test sessions that are run and reported for a patch. If you see posts from "Lustre Gerrit Janitor", this is testing that is not influenced by the test parameters. Meaning that, for your patch, you will not find a PPC test session run and reported by Lustre Gerrit Janitor.

If you see a post from "Maloo", these test results are (or should be) influenced by the patches test parameters.

I think things are working as expected, but feel free to ping me if you disagree and we can investigate.

Thanks,
James

From: lustre-devel [mailto:lustre-devel-bounces at lists.lustre.org] On Behalf Of quentin.bouget at cea.fr
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 9:33 AM
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@whamcloud.com>
Cc: lustre-devel at lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [testing] Maloo not scheduling tests

On 16/10/2019 17:23, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Oct 16, 2019, at 19:21, quentin.bouget at cea.fr<mailto:quentin.bouget@cea.fr> wrote:

Hello,
It seems like Maloo is not scheduling tests for this patch<https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/36292/> since I added some test parameters yesterday:

Test-Parameters: fortestonly testlist=sanity clientarch=ppc64
Are there problems on Maloo, or am I doing something wrong?

The "fortestonly" keyword is for patches that are not intended for landing (e.g. work-in-progress patches for early review), so only a limited number of tests are run.


Yes, I understand this. The idea was to check that the current version of the patch does fail on a big-endian client. But it does not seem like any tests are being scheduled.

EDIT: I just checked gerrit, there must have been a temporary failure, a retest was requested by M. Omstead.

Thanks,
Quentin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-devel-lustre.org/attachments/20191016/205a0056/attachment-0001.html>