[Gluster-Maintainers] Build failed in Jenkins: regression-test-with-multiplex #612

2018-01-26 Thread jenkins 
See 


Changes:

[Niels de Vos] packaging: python-ctypes only in RHEL <= 7

[Niels de Vos] build: use libtirpc by default, even if ipv6 is not the default

[Krutika Dhananjay] features/shard: shard options for GD2.

[Krutika Dhananjay] debug/io-stats: io-stats options for GD2

[Niels de Vos] gfapi : New APIs have been added to use lease feature in gluster

[Niels de Vos] build: restore ability to control verbosity settings

--
[...truncated 970.74 KB...]
No symbol table info available.

Thread 22 (Thread 12340):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x0e22 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#2  0x0247c3a8 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#3  0x0247c380 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#4  0x1c79 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#5  0x5a6b5b62 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#6  0x0007f45f in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#7  0x7fba25e469c0 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#8  0x0003 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#9  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 21 (Thread 12356):
#0  0x7fba2f2cd1c3 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 20 (Thread 12473):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 19 (Thread 12350):
#0  0x7fba2f2cd1c3 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 18 (Thread 12471):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 17 (Thread 12476):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x0e22 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#2  0x0247c3a8 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#3  0x0247c380 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#4  0x1c79 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#5  0x5a6b5b62 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#6  0x0007f458 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#7  0x7fb9e57fb9c0 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#8  0x0003 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#9  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 16 (Thread 12470):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 15 (Thread 12371):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 14 (Thread 12367):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 13 (Thread 12368):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 12 (Thread 12363):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 11 (Thread 12366):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 10 (Thread 12337):
#0  0x7fba2f96c585 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 9 (Thread 12336):
#0  0x7fba2f96c00d in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 8 (Thread 12365):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 7 (Thread 12335):
#0  0x7fba2f9652fd in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x7ffdac8d9ec0 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#2  0x7fba309a7c55 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#3  0x7fba2f9651d0 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#4  0x7fba239f0d28 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#5  0x02472be8 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#6  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 6 (Thread 12364):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 5 (Thread 12478):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 4 (Thread 12338):
#0  0x7fba2f290c4d in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1  0x in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.

Thread 3 (Thread 12475):
#0  0x7fba2f968a5e in ?? ()
No symbol table info

Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched

2018-01-26 Thread Atin Mukherjee 
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Raghavendra G 
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 4:49 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa  > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> > From: "Shyam Ranganathan" 
>> > To: "Gluster Devel" , "GlusterFS
>> Maintainers" 
>> > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 9:49:51 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched
>> >
>> > On 01/23/2018 03:17 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
>> > > 4.0 release has been branched!
>> > >
>> > > I will follow this up with a more detailed schedule for the release,
>> and
>> > > also the granted feature backport exceptions that we are waiting.
>> > >
>> > > Feature backports would need to make it in by this weekend, so that we
>> > > can tag RC0 by the end of the month.
>> >
>> > Backports need to be ready for merge on or before Jan, 29th 2018 3:00 PM
>> > Eastern TZ.
>> >
>> > Features that requested and hence are granted backport exceptions are as
>> > follows,
>> >
>> > 1) Dentry fop serializer xlator on brick stack
>> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/397
>> >
>> > @Du please backport the same to the 4.0 branch as the patch in master is
>> > merged.
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19340/1
> But this might fail smoke as the bug associated is not associated with 4.0
> branch. Blocked on 4.0 version tag in bugzilla.
>

I think you can use the same github issue id and don't need a bug here
since it's a feature?


>
>> >
>> > 2) Leases support on GlusterFS
>> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/350
>> >
>> > @Jiffin and @ndevos, there is one patch pending against master,
>> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/18785/ please do the needful and
>> backport
>> > this to the 4.0 branch.
>> >
>> > 3) Data corruption in write ordering of rebalance and application writes
>> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/308
>> >
>> > @susant, @du if we can conclude on the strategy here, please backport as
>> > needed.
>>
>> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19207/
>> Review comments need to be addressed and centos regressions are failing.
>>
>> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19202/
>> There are some suggestions on the patch. If others agree they are valid,
>> this patch can be considered as redundant with approach of #19207. However,
>> as I've mentioned in the comments there are some tradeoffs too. So, Waiting
>> for response to my comments. If nobody responds in the time period given,
>> we can merge the patch and susant will have to backport to 4.0 branch.
>>
>> >
>> > 4) Couple of patches that are tracked for a backport are,
>> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
>> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19267/ (prep for ctime changes in later
>> > releases)
>> >
>> > Other features discussed are not in scope for a backports to 4.0.
>> >
>> > If you asked for one and do not see it in this list, shout out!
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Only exception could be: https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Shyam
>> > > ___
>> > > Gluster-devel mailing list
>> > > gluster-de...@gluster.org
>> > > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>> > >
>> > ___
>> > maintainers mailing list
>> > maintainers@gluster.org
>> > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>> >
>> ___
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> gluster-de...@gluster.org
>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Raghavendra G
>
> ___
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>
>
___
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers

[Gluster-Maintainers] Build failed in Jenkins: netbsd-periodic #532

2018-01-26 Thread jenkins 
See 


Changes:

[Niels de Vos] build: use libtirpc by default, even if ipv6 is not the default

[atin] glusterd: process pmap sign in only when port is marked as free

[atin] glusterd: add profile_enabled flag in get-state

--
[...truncated 275.16 KB...]
./tests/basic/afr/granular-esh/granular-indices-but-non-granular-heal.t .. 
1..29
ok 1, LINENUM:11
ok 2, LINENUM:12
ok 3, LINENUM:14
ok 4, LINENUM:15
ok 5, LINENUM:16
ok 6, LINENUM:17
ok 7, LINENUM:18
ok 8, LINENUM:19
ok 9, LINENUM:20
ok 10, LINENUM:22
ok 11, LINENUM:25
ok 12, LINENUM:34
ok 13, LINENUM:39
ok 14, LINENUM:39
ok 15, LINENUM:43
ok 16, LINENUM:46
ok 17, LINENUM:47
ok 18, LINENUM:48
ok 19, LINENUM:51
ok 20, LINENUM:52
ok 21, LINENUM:53
ok 22, LINENUM:54
ok 23, LINENUM:60
ok 24, LINENUM:63
ok 25, LINENUM:68
ok 26, LINENUM:68
ok 27, LINENUM:72
ok 28, LINENUM:73
ok 29, LINENUM:74
ok
All tests successful.
Files=1, Tests=29, 24 wallclock secs ( 0.05 usr  0.00 sys +  1.94 cusr  2.86 
csys =  4.85 CPU)
Result: PASS
End of test 
./tests/basic/afr/granular-esh/granular-indices-but-non-granular-heal.t




[14:17:35] Running tests in file ./tests/basic/afr/granular-esh/replace-brick.t
./tests/basic/afr/granular-esh/replace-brick.t .. 
1..34
ok 1, LINENUM:7
ok 2, LINENUM:8
ok 3, LINENUM:9
ok 4, LINENUM:10
ok 5, LINENUM:11
ok 6, LINENUM:12
ok 7, LINENUM:13
ok 8, LINENUM:14
ok 9, LINENUM:15
ok 10, LINENUM:17
ok 11, LINENUM:26
ok 12, LINENUM:29
ok 13, LINENUM:32
ok 14, LINENUM:35
ok 15, LINENUM:38
ok 16, LINENUM:41
ok 17, LINENUM:43
ok 18, LINENUM:44
ok 19, LINENUM:46
ok 20, LINENUM:47
ok 21, LINENUM:48
ok 22, LINENUM:49
ok 23, LINENUM:50
ok 24, LINENUM:53
ok 25, LINENUM:56
ok 26, LINENUM:59
ok 27, LINENUM:60
ok 28, LINENUM:63
ok 29, LINENUM:65
ok 30, LINENUM:68
ok 31, LINENUM:69
ok 32, LINENUM:71
ok 33, LINENUM:72
ok 34, LINENUM:73
ok
All tests successful.
Files=1, Tests=34, 24 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr  0.04 sys +  1.95 cusr  3.06 
csys =  5.08 CPU)
Result: PASS
End of test ./tests/basic/afr/granular-esh/replace-brick.t




[14:17:59] Running tests in file ./tests/basic/afr/heal-info.t
./tests/basic/afr/heal-info.t .. 
1..9
ok 1, LINENUM:21
ok 2, LINENUM:22
ok 3, LINENUM:23
ok 4, LINENUM:24
ok 5, LINENUM:25
ok 6, LINENUM:26
ok 7, LINENUM:27
ok 8, LINENUM:33
ok 9, LINENUM:34
ok
All tests successful.
Files=1, Tests=9, 36 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr  0.02 sys +  4.93 cusr  5.89 
csys = 10.88 CPU)
Result: PASS
End of test ./tests/basic/afr/heal-info.t




[14:18:35] Running tests in file ./tests/basic/afr/heal-quota.t
touch: /mnt/glusterfs/0/b: Socket is not connected
dd: block size `1M': illegal number
cat: /proc/25342/cmdline: No such file or directory
Usage: gf_attach uds_path volfile_path (to attach)
   gf_attach -d uds_path brick_path (to detach)
dd: block size `1M': illegal number
./tests/basic/afr/heal-quota.t .. 
1..19
ok 1, LINENUM:10
ok 2, LINENUM:11
ok 3, LINENUM:12
ok 4, LINENUM:13
ok 5, LINENUM:14
ok 6, LINENUM:16
ok 7, LINENUM:17
ok 8, LINENUM:18
ok 9, LINENUM:19
ok 10, LINENUM:20
not ok 11 , LINENUM:22
FAILED COMMAND: touch /mnt/glusterfs/0/a /mnt/glusterfs/0/b
ok 12, LINENUM:24
ok 13, LINENUM:26
ok 14, LINENUM:27
ok 15, LINENUM:28
ok 16, LINENUM:29
ok 17, LINENUM:30
ok 18, LINENUM:32
ok 19, LINENUM:33
Failed 1/19 subtests 

Test Summary Report
---
./tests/basic/afr/heal-quota.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 19 Failed: 1)
  Failed test:  11
Files=1, Tests=19, 20 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr  0.00 sys +  1.59 cusr  2.48 
csys =  4.11 CPU)
Result: FAIL
./tests/basic/afr/heal-quota.t: bad status 1

   *
   *   REGRESSION FAILED   *
   * Retrying failed tests in case *
   * we got some spurious failures *
   *

touch: /mnt/glusterfs/0/b: Socket is not connected
dd: block size `1M': illegal number
cat: /proc/12090/cmdline: No such file or directory
Usage: gf_attach uds_path volfile_path (to attach)
   gf_attach -d uds_path brick_path (to detach)
dd: block size `1M': illegal number
./tests/basic/afr/heal-quota.t .. 
1..19
ok 1, LINENUM:10
ok 2, LINENUM:11
ok 3, LINENUM:12
ok 4, LINENUM:13
ok 5, LINENUM:14
ok 6, LINENUM:16
ok 7, LINENUM:17
ok 8, LINENUM:18
ok 9, LINENUM:19
ok 10, LINENUM:20
not ok 11 , LINENUM:22
FAILED COMMAND: touch /mnt/glusterfs/0/a /mnt/glusterfs/0/b
ok 12, LINENUM:24
ok 13, LINENUM:26
ok 14, LINENUM:27
ok 15, LINENUM:28
ok 16, LINENUM:29
ok 17,

[Gluster-Maintainers] Jenkins build is back to normal : regression-test-with-multiplex #611

2018-01-26 Thread jenkins 
See 


___
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers

Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched

2018-01-26 Thread Raghavendra G 
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 4:49 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa 
wrote:

>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Shyam Ranganathan" 
> > To: "Gluster Devel" , "GlusterFS
> Maintainers" 
> > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 9:49:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched
> >
> > On 01/23/2018 03:17 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
> > > 4.0 release has been branched!
> > >
> > > I will follow this up with a more detailed schedule for the release,
> and
> > > also the granted feature backport exceptions that we are waiting.
> > >
> > > Feature backports would need to make it in by this weekend, so that we
> > > can tag RC0 by the end of the month.
> >
> > Backports need to be ready for merge on or before Jan, 29th 2018 3:00 PM
> > Eastern TZ.
> >
> > Features that requested and hence are granted backport exceptions are as
> > follows,
> >
> > 1) Dentry fop serializer xlator on brick stack
> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/397
> >
> > @Du please backport the same to the 4.0 branch as the patch in master is
> > merged.
>
> Sure.
>

https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19340/1
But this might fail smoke as the bug associated is not associated with 4.0
branch. Blocked on 4.0 version tag in bugzilla.


> >
> > 2) Leases support on GlusterFS
> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/350
> >
> > @Jiffin and @ndevos, there is one patch pending against master,
> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/18785/ please do the needful and backport
> > this to the 4.0 branch.
> >
> > 3) Data corruption in write ordering of rebalance and application writes
> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/308
> >
> > @susant, @du if we can conclude on the strategy here, please backport as
> > needed.
>
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19207/
> Review comments need to be addressed and centos regressions are failing.
>
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19202/
> There are some suggestions on the patch. If others agree they are valid,
> this patch can be considered as redundant with approach of #19207. However,
> as I've mentioned in the comments there are some tradeoffs too. So, Waiting
> for response to my comments. If nobody responds in the time period given,
> we can merge the patch and susant will have to backport to 4.0 branch.
>
> >
> > 4) Couple of patches that are tracked for a backport are,
> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19267/ (prep for ctime changes in later
> > releases)
> >
> > Other features discussed are not in scope for a backports to 4.0.
> >
> > If you asked for one and do not see it in this list, shout out!
> >
> > >
> > > Only exception could be: https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Shyam
> > > ___
> > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > > gluster-de...@gluster.org
> > > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> > >
> > ___
> > maintainers mailing list
> > maintainers@gluster.org
> > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> >
> ___
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> gluster-de...@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>



-- 
Raghavendra G
___
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers

Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched

2018-01-26 Thread Raghavendra Gowdappa 


- Original Message -
> From: "Shyam Ranganathan" 
> To: "Gluster Devel" , "GlusterFS Maintainers" 
> 
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 9:49:51 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched
> 
> On 01/23/2018 03:17 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
> > 4.0 release has been branched!
> > 
> > I will follow this up with a more detailed schedule for the release, and
> > also the granted feature backport exceptions that we are waiting.
> > 
> > Feature backports would need to make it in by this weekend, so that we
> > can tag RC0 by the end of the month.
> 
> Backports need to be ready for merge on or before Jan, 29th 2018 3:00 PM
> Eastern TZ.
> 
> Features that requested and hence are granted backport exceptions are as
> follows,
> 
> 1) Dentry fop serializer xlator on brick stack
> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/397
> 
> @Du please backport the same to the 4.0 branch as the patch in master is
> merged.

Sure.

> 
> 2) Leases support on GlusterFS
> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/350
> 
> @Jiffin and @ndevos, there is one patch pending against master,
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/18785/ please do the needful and backport
> this to the 4.0 branch.
> 
> 3) Data corruption in write ordering of rebalance and application writes
> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/308
> 
> @susant, @du if we can conclude on the strategy here, please backport as
> needed.

https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19207/
Review comments need to be addressed and centos regressions are failing.

https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19202/
There are some suggestions on the patch. If others agree they are valid, this 
patch can be considered as redundant with approach of #19207. However, as I've 
mentioned in the comments there are some tradeoffs too. So, Waiting for 
response to my comments. If nobody responds in the time period given, we can 
merge the patch and susant will have to backport to 4.0 branch.

> 
> 4) Couple of patches that are tracked for a backport are,
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19267/ (prep for ctime changes in later
> releases)
> 
> Other features discussed are not in scope for a backports to 4.0.
> 
> If you asked for one and do not see it in this list, shout out!
> 
> > 
> > Only exception could be: https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Shyam
> > ___
> > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > gluster-de...@gluster.org
> > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> > 
> ___
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> 
___
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers