On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Dafna Ron wrote:
>
>> I don't recall seeing it fail before this time.
>> We can re-trigger the patch and see if it passes a second time or fails
>> on the same issue.
>>
>> 1. Sent a patch to disable the test
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Dafna Ron wrote:
> I don't recall seeing it fail before this time.
> We can re-trigger the patch and see if it passes a second time or fails on
> the same issue.
>
> 1. Sent a patch to disable the test for the time being.
2. I have some doubt, spending 3 seconds on
I don't recall seeing it fail before this time.
We can re-trigger the patch and see if it passes a second time or fails on
the same issue.
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:11 PM, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Dafna Ron wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have a failure on 002_bootstrap.
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Dafna Ron wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have a failure on 002_bootstrap.get_host_numa_nodes in basic suite
> and 004_basic_sanity.vm_run on upgrade from release suite.
>
The numa test is a new test, so would actually suspect the test.
Did it pass earlier? I have some susp
sorry, forgot to add the patch and build links. see inline
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Dafna Ron wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have a failure on 002_bootstrap.get_host_numa_nodes in basic suite
> and 004_basic_sanity.vm_run on upgrade from release suite.
>
> Eli, can you please take a look? it seem
Hi,
We have a failure on 002_bootstrap.get_host_numa_nodes in basic suite and
004_basic_sanity.vm_run on upgrade from release suite.
Eli, can you please take a look? it seems to be the same reason - host is
down or not suitable
*Link and headline of suspected patches: Link to Job:Link to all
