<div dir="ltr">I agree, new version on the way w/o sleep! <br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Anders Wallin</div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:19 PM Mathieu Desnoyers <<a href="mailto:mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com">mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">----- On Mar 31, 2021, at 2:56 PM, lttng-dev <a href="mailto:lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org" target="_blank">lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org</a> wrote:<br>
<br>
> the following tests fails on arm64<br>
> - test_event_vpid_tracker ust 0 "${EVENT_NAME}"<br>
> - test_event_vpid_track_untrack ust 0 "${EVENT_NAME}"<br>
> - test_event_pid_tracker ust 0 "${EVENT_NAME}"<br>
> - test_event_pid_track_untrack ust 0 "${EVENT_NAME}"<br>
> <br>
> Signed-off-by: Anders Wallin <<a href="mailto:wallinux@gmail.com" target="_blank">wallinux@gmail.com</a>><br>
> ---<br>
> tests/regression/tools/tracker/test_event_tracker | 4 +++-<br>
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)<br>
> <br>
> diff --git a/tests/regression/tools/tracker/test_event_tracker<br>
> b/tests/regression/tools/tracker/test_event_tracker<br>
> index 711690af..649c7e61 100755<br>
> --- a/tests/regression/tools/tracker/test_event_tracker<br>
> +++ b/tests/regression/tools/tracker/test_event_tracker<br>
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@<br>
> #<br>
> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only<br>
> <br>
> -TEST_DESC="LTTng - Event traker test"<br>
> +TEST_DESC="LTTng - Event tracker test"<br>
> <br>
> CURDIR=$(dirname "$0")/<br>
> TESTDIR="$CURDIR/../../.."<br>
> @@ -42,6 +42,8 @@ function prepare_ust_app<br>
> <br>
> $TESTAPP_BIN -i $NR_ITER -w $NR_USEC_WAIT -a "$AFTER_FIRST_PATH" -b<br>
> "$BEFORE_LAST_PATH" &<br>
> CHILD_PID=$!<br>
> + # voluntary context switch to start $TESTAPP_BIN<br>
> + sleep 0.1<br>
<br>
No, we have been bitten again and again by test issues hidden by sleeps in the<br>
test code. Using sleeps for synchronization is flaky.<br>
<br>
I don't know if we documented it, but we as maintainers are strongly against<br>
anything that looks like a delay-based approach to fixing a race in the tests.<br>
This typically just bury the race under the carpet and it shows up only in<br>
specific conditions on the CI workers.<br>
<br>
We need to add proper rendez-vous based synchronization to the test if some<br>
is missing.<br>
<br>
Adding Jérémie in CC.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Mathieu<br>
<br>
<br>
> }<br>
> <br>
> function trace_ust_app<br>
> --<br>
> 2.31.1<br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> lttng-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org" target="_blank">lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev</a><br>
<br>
-- <br>
Mathieu Desnoyers<br>
EfficiOS Inc.<br>
<a href="http://www.efficios.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.efficios.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div>