--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
30.0.50, master: 'erc--check-prompt-input-for-multiline-blanks' test fail |
|
Date: |
Tue, 09 Jul 2024 04:08:06 -0400 |
Since few days I see 'erc--check-prompt-input-for-multiline-blanks'
failing. I think the fail is intermittent and because of that I could
not determine the commit that introduced it.
I observe this both on emacs-30 both on master, the first commit in
emacs-30 where I observed it is 2fb6a98ecfa1579273a640e923f2e52f75e1f7ad
which seems unrelated (but I mention it so we have a point in time).
This is the output I see:
Test erc--check-prompt-input-for-multiline-blanks backtrace:
user-error("Process not running")
erc--run-input-validation-checks(#s(erc--input-split :string "a" :in
run-hook-with-args(erc--run-input-validation-checks #s(erc--input-sp
erc-send-current-line()
#f(compiled-function (next) #<bytecode 0x1eab02298fb35043>)(#f(lambd
funcall(#f(compiled-function (next) #<bytecode 0x1eab02298fb35043>)
(progn (fset 'erc-server-buffer vnew) (fset 'erc-process-input-line
(unwind-protect (progn (fset 'erc-server-buffer vnew) (fset 'erc-pro
(let* ((vnew #'(lambda (&rest r) (setq calls (cons r calls)))) (vnew
(let* ((erc--input-review-functions (remove 'erc-add-to-input-ring e
(save-current-buffer (set-buffer (get-buffer-create "FakeNet")) (let
erc-tests-common-with-process-input-spy(#f(compiled-function (next)
#f(compiled-function () #<bytecode -0xaf493cb21b42d4b>)()
#f(compiled-function () #<bytecode -0x1a6c2873f655e48c>)()
handler-bind-1(#f(compiled-function () #<bytecode -0x1a6c2873f655e48
ert--run-test-internal(#s(ert--test-execution-info :test #s(ert-test
ert-run-test(#s(ert-test :name erc--check-prompt-input-for-multiline
ert-run-or-rerun-test(#s(ert--stats :selector ... :tests ... :test-m
ert-run-tests((not (or (tag :expensive-test) (tag :unstable))) #f(co
ert-run-tests-batch((not (or (tag :expensive-test) (tag :unstable)))
ert-run-tests-batch-and-exit((not (or (tag :expensive-test) (tag :un
eval((ert-run-tests-batch-and-exit '(not (or (tag :expensive-test) (
command-line-1(("-L" ":." "-l" "ert" "--eval" "(setq treesit-extra-l
command-line()
normal-top-level()
Test erc--check-prompt-input-for-multiline-blanks condition:
Info: Opts: (+wb -sw), Input: "a", want: (a)
(user-error "Process not running")
FAILED 5/95 erc--check-prompt-input-for-multiline-blanks (10.525627 sec)
at lisp/erc/erc-tests.el:1637
Andrea
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#72004: 30.0.50, master: 'erc--check-prompt-input-for-multiline-blanks' test fail |
|
Date: |
Fri, 12 Jul 2024 03:30:55 -0400 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
"J.P." <jp@neverwas.me> writes:
> Andrea Corallo <acorallo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> I buy the theory of this being related to trampoline generation under
>> high system load, looking at my logs I see this test failing only with
>> native compilation an passing without.
>>
>> I'm wondering if we could work around the issue somehow 🤔
>
> I'm afraid I can offer next to nothing when it comes to serious insights
> about Emacs internals and related magic 😞
>
>>
>> Also I'm not sure the right tag is :expensive, shouldn't be :unstable?
>
> If we want to prevent the test from running completely (at least on
> EMBA), then :unstable would indeed make sense. However, if we'd like the
> test to run on the 3x daily expensive pipelines, I'm fairly confident my
> latest change sidesteps the issue. It now waits to start the subprocess,
> which was previously too short-lived, until after the macro has done its
> (potentially time-consuming) advising. Thus, the liveliness check that
> was signaling the error should now always find a running process.
> (Although, for good measure, I also lengthened the timeout from 10s to
> 5m.) All this said, I'm happy to change it to :unstable or try a safer
> approach, such as mocking `process-status'. Thanks.
Generally speaking I think we should flag tests for what they are and
then tune the EMBA testing strategy to our needs afterward. That said
with a 5m timeout the test is now probably more expansive than unstable
so I think the classificaiton it's fine :)
Thanks closing this.
Andrea
--- End Message ---