action #52418
closedcoordination #42854: [functional][y][epic] Introduce relevant installation validation test modules
[functional][y] Validate setup in lvm+RAID1 test suite
Added by riafarov almost 5 years ago. Updated over 3 years ago.
0%
Description
Motivation¶
As of now it's more like automated installation. I as a QA engineer would like to detect if SUT gets configured as expected.
Acceptance criteria¶
- Partitioning is validated for lvm+RAID1 scenarios where enabled (SLES 12 and 15, TW)
Suggestions¶
Test is enabled on UEFI, xen and hyperv. So, we have slightly different expectations. Having data driven test module would be perfect fit here.
Updated by riafarov almost 5 years ago
- Subject changed from [functional][y] Introduce test module for lvm+RAID1 test to [functional][y] Validate setup in lvm+RAID1 test suite
- Description updated (diff)
- Estimated time set to 5.00 h
Updated by ybonatakis almost 5 years ago
- Status changed from Workable to In Progress
- Assignee set to ybonatakis
Updated by riafarov almost 5 years ago
- Due date changed from 2019-07-09 to 2019-07-30
Updated by ybonatakis almost 5 years ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Feedback
Updated by riafarov almost 5 years ago
- Due date changed from 2019-07-30 to 2019-08-13
- Target version changed from Milestone 26 to Milestone 27
Review comments are addressed, needs another review + missing VRs.
For SLE 15, we can clone SP1 job, all mediums are still available.
Updated by riafarov over 4 years ago
- Due date changed from 2019-08-13 to 2019-08-27
- Status changed from Feedback to Workable
PR not merged and needs some adjustments.
Updated by JERiveraMoya over 4 years ago
- Status changed from Workable to In Progress
- Assignee set to JERiveraMoya
I will try to test the code creating yamls for other scenarios, solving some minor comments on the PR and applying commits on top.
Updated by JERiveraMoya over 4 years ago
- Assignee deleted (
JERiveraMoya)
Assigning myself, sorry, I didn't have time to take a look at the end. @ybonatakis, if you are back, you can assign back to you to continue.
Updated by ybonatakis over 4 years ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Feedback
Updated by riafarov over 4 years ago
- Due date changed from 2019-08-27 to 2019-09-10
- Status changed from Feedback to In Progress
Updated by ybonatakis over 4 years ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Feedback
i run validations for TW and SLE12. SLE15 is broken for now. i have updated the PR and is ready for reviews.
Updated by riafarov over 4 years ago
- Due date changed from 2019-09-10 to 2019-09-24
- Estimated time deleted (
5.00 h)
Schedules + test data might need more love.
Updated by ybonatakis over 4 years ago
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1150370 has been filed for the difference between the RAID1 of sle12 and sle15.
Updated by mgriessmeier over 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Milestone 27 to Milestone 28
Updated by JERiveraMoya over 4 years ago
- Status changed from Feedback to Resolved
Updated by dimstar over 4 years ago
- Status changed from Resolved to In Progress
New test fails in Tumbleweed - please investigate/correct:
https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1040608#step/validate_lvm_raid1/63
Updated by JERiveraMoya over 4 years ago
- Due date changed from 2019-09-24 to 2019-10-08
Updated by JERiveraMoya over 4 years ago
- Priority changed from Normal to High
Setting higher priority as we need to attend breaks first.
Updated by ybonatakis over 4 years ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Feedback
Updated by ybonatakis over 4 years ago
- Status changed from Feedback to Resolved
Updated by okurz over 4 years ago
This is an autogenerated message for openQA integration by the openqa_review script:
This bug is still referenced in a failing openQA test: lvm+RAID1
https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1063675
To prevent further reminder comments one of the following options should be followed:
- The test scenario is fixed by applying the bug fix to the tested product or the test is adjusted
- The openQA job group is moved to "Released"
- The label in the openQA scenario is removed