Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Should multi_threaded_executor_test have the upper bound check? #751

Closed
cho3 opened this issue Jun 3, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

Should multi_threaded_executor_test have the upper bound check? #751

cho3 opened this issue Jun 3, 2019 · 2 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working Linux Linux support tests Failing or missing tests

Comments

@cho3
Copy link
Contributor

cho3 commented Jun 3, 2019

Bug report

The multithreaded executor test is kind of flaky.

Required Info:

  • Operating System: Ubuntu 16.04
  • Installation type: Source
  • Version or commit hash:
  • DDS implementation: fastRTPS
  • Client library (if applicable): rclcpp

Steps to reproduce issue

Below vaguely reproduces CI conditions

# terminal 1
colcon build --packages-up-to rclcpp
while ./build/rclcpp/test_multi_threaded_executor ; do :;  done
# terminal 2, where 12 = number of cores
stress -m 12 -c 12

Expected behavior

Test should be able to run without failing

Actual behavior

Test fails

Additional information

The test failure is generally because the upper bound is not satisfied. I think the upper bound condition is outside the scope of the test, which is intended to ensure that the timer is not double taken (i.e. small period). On a stressed system (such as CI), we can't guarantee how much CPU time the test will receive, making the upper bound hard to satisfy.

I think if we remove the upper bound condition on the test, we won't be compromising the integrity of the test, and we'll make it less flaky on CI.

@clalancette
Copy link
Contributor

I apologize for the long delay here. Looking at it, I agree with you that we shouldn't need the upper bound here; would you mind submitting a pull request to remove it? Thanks.

@clalancette clalancette added the bug Something isn't working label Jul 2, 2019
@chapulina chapulina added Linux Linux support tests Failing or missing tests labels Feb 22, 2021
@clalancette
Copy link
Contributor

We don't actually have the upper bound anymore, so I'm closing this out.

nnmm pushed a commit to ApexAI/rclcpp that referenced this issue Jul 9, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working Linux Linux support tests Failing or missing tests
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants