| To: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Failure of xfstest 229 |
| From: | Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 20 May 2011 09:35:03 -0700 |
| Cc: | XFS Mailing List <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20110520025840.GP32466@dastard> |
| Organization: | IBM |
| References: | <1305852937.7661.369.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110520025840.GP32466@dastard> |
| Reply-to: | sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx |
Can it run successfully by fluke sometimes ? I did have a successful run on the 20G filesystem yesterday once, but not able to reproduce it again --------------- FSTYP -- xfs (non-debug) PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 test201 2.6.39 MKFS_OPTIONS -- -f -bsize=4096 /dev/sdd2 MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o context=system_u:object_r:nfs_t:s0 /dev/sdd2 /mnt/xfsScratchMntPt 229 70s ... 118s Ran: 229 Passed all 1 tests ----------------- chandra On Fri, 2011-05-20 at 12:58 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 05:55:37PM -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I remember running this test successfully sometime back. > > No. it's never passed. It's a placeholder to remind us how to > reproduce a known problem that is difficult to fix. > > Cheers, > > Dave. > |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: drastic changes to allocsize semantics in or around 2.6.38?, Marc Lehmann |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Failure of xfstest 229, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Failure of xfstest 229, Dave Chinner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Failure of xfstest 229, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |