There was a comparison done by previous Intel test team, and on a high level, sanity test cases were mostly the same between us with 1 extra test in WR sanity
suite.
The main difference may be our configurations and verifications.
There are couple of things I know of that might cause the differences in results:
·
OpenStack neutron configurations:
o
In our config, the external traffic goes through neutron routers to reach the vms, and connectivity verification is included in most openstack sanity
test we run. Perhaps that is something Nic’s team can look into.
·
Couple of the platform sanity issues we reported were more frequently seen on IPv6 systems (Christopher originally reported in a different LP). This
is another item Nic can consider.
·
1868567 is a stx-monitor test case we recently added to the sanity suite to test system applications, this test is available in stx-test. Nic could
pick up this test if needed.
·
1869739 is a configuration alarm issue without obvious system impact, this can only be found if the overall system health including alarms were verified
explicitly in every test. Nic could also pick up this one easily because it’s already included in pytest framework.
Hope that helps.
Regards,
Yang
From: Jascanu, Nicolae [mailto:nicolae.jascanu@intel.com]
Sent: April-03-20 7:49 AM
To: Jones, Bruce E; Liu, Yang (YOW)
Cc: 'starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io'
Subject: RE: [ Test ] meeting notes - 03/31/2020
Hi Bruce,
Hi Yang,
Looks like the bugs 1863795 and 1859645 are duplicates of 1856078. This was raised by Cristopher and each time we encountered, we’ve stated this in the report. Seems that
we need an upgrade to Helm V3.
For the rest of bugs, we need to replicate them after the daily finishes. I guess that Yang is executing also other sanity tests.
Regards,
Nicolae Jascanu, Ph.D.
TSD Engineering Manager
Internet Of Things Group
Galati, Romania
From: Jones, Bruce E <bruce.e.jones@intel.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2020 22:53
To: Liu, Yang (YOW) <yang.liu@windriver.com>; Jascanu, Nicolae <nicolae.jascanu@intel.com>
Cc: 'starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io' <starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io>
Subject: RE: [ Test ] meeting notes - 03/31/2020
Yang, I’m puzzled by the different Sanity results. Do you and Nic know why the Intel team is seeing Green Sanity runs, and the WR team is seeing multiple issues?
Are we running different tests? Different images?
Meanwhile, congratulations on pulling the Feature and Regression plan together. It’s looking good, thanks to great work by you and the teams!
bruej
From: Liu, Yang (YOW) [mailto:yang.liu@windriver.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2020 9:09 AM
To: 'starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io' <starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io>
Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [ Test ] meeting notes - 03/31/2020
Agenda/meeting notes are posted here:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stx-test
Agenda for 03/31/2020
Attendees: Yang, Mihail, Nicolae, George, Cosmin, Sharath, Claudiu,
Bruce, ChrisW, Wendy
1. Sanity Status:
·
Sanity issues reported by WR:
·
Sanity issues reported by Intel:
2. stx4.0 testing
·
Release plan:
§
automated and manual test update needed, may be time consuming
§
target 06-05
§
image did not build - fixed
§
03-31 build still failed, but went further
·
Targeted feature completion date: 06-08
·
Targeted regression completion date: 06-15 (pushing out 1 week)
3. Unified santiy
4. Opens
·
Servers/test environment setup within Nic's team: