On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 10:43, Nigel Babu <nig...@redhat.com> wrote: > I've reverted the original patch entirely. Our policy is to either mark > the test as bad or revert the entire patch. This seems to have caused > multiple failures in the test system, so I've reverted the entire patch. > Please re-land the patch with any fixes as a fresh review. >
Thanks Nigel. The patches waiting on the regression queue need to be rebased. Only doing a ‘recheck centos’ is not going to be helpful. > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Atin Mukherjee <amukh...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> commit d206fab73f6815c927a84171ee9361c9b31557b1 >> Author: Kinglong Mee <mijinl...@open-fs.com> >> Date: Mon Apr 9 08:33:51 2018 -0400 >> >> storage/posix: add pgfid in readdirp if needed >> >> Change-Id: I6745428fd9d4e402bf2cad52cee8ab46b7fd822f >> fixes: bz#1560319 >> Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee <mijinl...@open-fs.com> >> >> >> The above commit has caused (thanks to Amar for bisect!) trash.t test in >> upstream CI to fail very frequently. As per fstat.gluster.org (refer : >> https://bit.ly/2qGcSP6) this test has failed 17 times in master branch >> in last 4 days. Given we're nearing GlusterFS 4.1 branching and there're >> few important patches blocked in the regression pipeline queue, I've sent a >> patch https://review.gluster.org/19894 to mark trash.t as bad for now >> as a temporary arrangement. >> >> I request Kinglong and the owner of trash feature to debug this issue and >> send a fix which can revert back my change. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gluster-devel mailing list >> Gluster-devel@gluster.org >> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel >> > > > > -- > nigelb > -- - Atin (atinm)
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
