On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 03:10:21PM +0300, Alexandr Miloslavskiy wrote:
> On 24.11.2021 15:07, James McCoy wrote:
> > The comment says IOException, but this is InterruptedException. Is that
> > intentional?
>
>
> Catching InterruptedException is simply to be able to call
> 'tunnelAgent.join()'.
On 24.11.2021 15:07, James McCoy wrote:
The comment says IOException, but this is InterruptedException. Is that
intentional?
Catching InterruptedException is simply to be able to call
'tunnelAgent.join()'. The comment is correct. The difference between
'tunnelAgent.join()' and
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 02:13:20AM +0300, Alexandr Miloslavskiy wrote:
> Indeed there was a race condition where TunnelAgent could begin writing at
> the same time when pipe is being closed. This resulted in an unexpected
> IOException, which was detected by the test.
> Please find the patch
Indeed there was a race condition where TunnelAgent could begin writing
at the same time when pipe is being closed. This resulted in an
unexpected IOException, which was detected by the test.
This is purely a test issue and should not be a problem for real
applications.
Unfortunately it's
Thanks!
I tinkered with it a bit to be able to run multiple loops in parallel
(it requires changing '-Dtest.rootdir' to unique absolute dir in each
parallel run).
When running 8 loops at once, with just the guilty test, I can reproduce
the problem within ~10 secs.
Going to investigate
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 12:54:49AM +0300, Alexandr Miloslavskiy wrote:
> On 22.11.2021 3:35, James McCoy wrote:
> > Yes, I just hit it as composing this email, although I hadn't in an
> > earlier 100x loop of the JavaHL suite.
>
> Could you please give more information? :)
I setup as you
On 22.11.2021 3:35, James McCoy wrote:
Yes, I just hit it as composing this email, although I hadn't in an
earlier 100x loop of the JavaHL suite.
Could you please give more information? :)
Did you reproduce on x86-64?
Were you running the entire suite?
Did you run it from a loop?
Any ideas
On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:55:56PM +0300, Alexandr Miloslavskiy wrote:
> I have tested on Ubuntu 20.04 (on x86-64 arch):
>
> * Ran entire JavaHL test package 130 times
> (using a loop in shell script).
> Not a single error; tests succeed every single time.
>
> * Ran just the reported test
I have tested on Ubuntu 20.04 (on x86-64 arch):
* Ran entire JavaHL test package 130 times
(using a loop in shell script).
Not a single error; tests succeed every single time.
* Ran just the reported test 1000 times; again no errors.
The test is
For two days, I struggled to build SVN on my Ubuntu 20.04 with external
serf. Finally I managed [1], tomorrow I'll try to reproduce the problem
in tests.
[1]
Den fre 23 juli 2021 14:57Alexandr Miloslavskiy <
alexandr.miloslavs...@syntevo.com> skrev:
> On 23.07.2021 2:41, Daniel Sahlberg wrote:
> > A kind reminder to check if we ever got to the bottom of this?
>
> Yes, sorry! I consulted my TODO list and found that my boss "kindly"
> moved it to
On 23.07.2021 2:41, Daniel Sahlberg wrote:
> A kind reminder to check if we ever got to the bottom of this?
Yes, sorry! I consulted my TODO list and found that my boss "kindly"
moved it to position #9 We agreed that I will fix it next thing, I
would expect somewhere on Monday next week.
Den tis 16 feb. 2021 kl 14:10 skrev Alexandr Miloslavskiy <
alexandr.miloslavs...@syntevo.com>:
> On 16.02.2021 15:27, James McCoy wrote:
>
> > Looks like it's more of a timing issue than something architecture
> > specific. The failure has also occurred on i386 and retries have since
> >
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 10:19 PM Alexandr Miloslavskiy
wrote:
>
> Going to take longer, sorry. I'm bombarded with things to take care
> of... While trying to have vacation, huh. Again, of the flaky test
> stands in the way, I wouldn't mind of you just comment it out for now.
Please enjoy your
Going to take longer, sorry. I'm bombarded with things to take care
of... While trying to have vacation, huh. Again, of the flaky test
stands in the way, I wouldn't mind of you just comment it out for now.
On 16.02.2021 15:27, James McCoy wrote:
> Looks like it's more of a timing issue than something architecture
> specific. The failure has also occurred on i386 and retries have since
> succeeded on mipsel, and my manual tests on mips64el have sporadically
> succeeded.
I can try to have a look
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 08:25:26AM +0100, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 6:36 PM James McCoy wrote:
> >
> > One of the new JavaHL tests
> > (testCrash_RequestChannel_nativeRead_AfterException) is failing on
> > Debian's armhf, mips64el, mipsel, and powerpc builders:
Looks like
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 08:25:26AM +0100, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 6:36 PM James McCoy wrote:
> >
> > One of the new JavaHL tests
> > (testCrash_RequestChannel_nativeRead_AfterException) is failing on
> > Debian's armhf, mips64el, mipsel, and powerpc builders:
> >
> >
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 6:36 PM James McCoy wrote:
>
> One of the new JavaHL tests
> (testCrash_RequestChannel_nativeRead_AfterException) is failing on
> Debian's armhf, mips64el, mipsel, and powerpc builders:
>
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=subversion=1.14.1-1=sid
>
> There
One of the new JavaHL tests
(testCrash_RequestChannel_nativeRead_AfterException) is failing on
Debian's armhf, mips64el, mipsel, and powerpc builders:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=subversion=1.14.1-1=sid
There was 1 failure:
1)
20 matches
Mail list logo
