-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32k
[3.9] bpo-41682: fixed flaky test test_sendfile_close_peer_in_the_middle_of_receiving (GH-30845) #30861
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
Conversation
(cherry picked from commit 1c705fd) Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
@kumaraditya303 and @pablogsal: Status check is done, and it's a failure ❌ . |
@kumaraditya303 and @pablogsal: Status check is done, and it's a success ✅ . |
1 similar comment
@kumaraditya303 and @pablogsal: Status check is done, and it's a success ✅ . |
@vstinner: Please replace |
# 128 KiB plus small unaligned to buffer chunk | ||
DATA = b"SendfileBaseData" * (1024 * 8 + 1) | ||
|
||
# 256 KiB plus small unaligned to buffer chunk | ||
# Newer versions of Windows seems to have increased its internal | ||
# buffer and tries to send as much of the data as it can as it | ||
# has some form of buffering for this which is less than 256KiB | ||
# on newer server versions and Windows 11. | ||
# So DATA should be larger than 256 KiB to make this test reliable. | ||
DATA = b"x" * (1024 * 256 + 1) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I keep coming back to this. I don't think it's worth changing anything (too much churn), but I would still like to point out that the original code had 16 bytes at the end of the 128 kb; the new code has only one extra byte after the 256 kb.
Also, this change affects almost all tests in this file, rather than just the one flaky test.
Finally, the use of "SendfileBaseData" as the dummy data seemed to be intentional to help debugging the test (e.g. test_sock_sendfile_mix_with_regular_send).
Just making sure you were aware of all these. :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't read the original PR. I only helped to backport the change because IMO it's better to run a test than skipping it in 3.9 and 3.10 branch.
@kumaraditya303: Do you want to write a PR to make changes suggested by @gvanrossum?
…_receiving (pythonGH-30845) (python#30861) (cherry picked from commit 1c705fd) Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit 1c705fd)
Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya 59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com
https://bugs.python.org/issue41682