Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

@codomposer
Copy link
Contributor

Pull Request: Add Comprehensive Unit Tests for ThreadPool Module

Bug

Missing test coverage for critical infrastructure component bittensor/core/threadpool.py (10.5KB). The PriorityThreadPoolExecutor had no dedicated unit tests, leaving critical concurrent task execution infrastructure untested.

Description of the Change

This PR adds a comprehensive test suite (tests/unit_tests/test_threadpool.py) with 35 unit tests covering all aspects of the threadpool module:

Test Coverage Added:

Core Functionality (9 tests)

  • WorkItem creation, execution, exception handling, and cancellation
  • Stale task detection based on BLOCKTIME
  • Executor initialization with various parameters
  • Input validation (invalid max_workers, non-callable initializers)
  • Queue state monitoring (is_empty property)

Task Submission & Priority Management (5 tests)

  • Task submission with various priority levels
  • Priority queue ordering verification
  • Random priority assignment for tasks without explicit priority
  • Epsilon randomization for priority tie-breaking
  • Thread-safe concurrent task submission

Thread Pool Scaling & Lifecycle (2 tests)

  • Thread creation up to max_workers limit
  • Worker thread creation, execution, and termination

Shutdown Behavior (3 tests)

  • Graceful shutdown (wait=True)
  • Immediate shutdown (wait=False)
  • RuntimeError on post-shutdown submissions

Error Handling (2 tests)

  • BrokenThreadPool exception handling
  • Submission to broken pool validation

Initializer Functions (2 tests)

  • Custom initializer with initargs
  • Failed initializer handling and pool marking as broken

Configuration & Environment (5 tests)

  • BT_PRIORITY_MAX_WORKERS environment variable
  • BT_PRIORITY_MAXSIZE environment variable
  • Argparse integration (add_args method)
  • Custom prefix support
  • Config class method validation

Worker Function Behavior (2 tests)

  • Worker exit on NULL_ENTRY signal
  • Work item execution from queue

Edge Cases (5 tests)

  • Priority=0 conversion to random value
  • Multiple shutdown calls safety
  • Context manager compatibility
  • Large number of tasks (100 tasks stress test)
  • Mixed args and kwargs handling

Alternate Designs

Alternative approaches considered:

  1. Integration tests only - Rejected because unit tests provide faster feedback and better isolation
  2. Mocking the entire executor - Rejected because we need to test actual concurrent behavior
  3. Fewer tests with broader scope - Rejected to ensure comprehensive coverage of all code paths

The chosen approach provides thorough unit-level testing while maintaining test independence and fast execution.

Possible Drawbacks

  • Adds ~700 lines of test code to maintain
  • Some tests use time.sleep() which may be flaky in extremely slow CI environments
  • Thread-based tests may occasionally have timing issues, though timeouts are generous (2-5 seconds)

Results:

35 passed, 1 warning in 4.01s

All tests pass successfully:

  • ✅ 4 WorkItem tests
  • ✅ 5 PriorityThreadPoolExecutor initialization tests
  • ✅ 5 Task submission tests
  • ✅ 2 Thread pool scaling tests
  • ✅ 3 Executor shutdown tests
  • ✅ 2 BrokenThreadPool tests
  • ✅ 2 Initializer tests
  • ✅ 5 Configuration tests
  • ✅ 2 Worker function tests
  • ✅ 5 Edge case tests

Test Categories Verified:

  • ✅ Concurrent task execution
  • ✅ Priority-based ordering
  • ✅ Thread safety
  • ✅ Error handling
  • ✅ Configuration management
  • ✅ Resource cleanup
  • ✅ Edge cases

Contribution by Gittensor, learn more at https://gittensor.io/

@codomposer codomposer closed this Dec 2, 2025
@codomposer codomposer reopened this Dec 2, 2025
@thewhaleking thewhaleking requested a review from a team December 3, 2025 13:32
@codomposer codomposer closed this Dec 3, 2025
@codomposer codomposer reopened this Dec 4, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@basfroman basfroman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please pull SDKv10 in your PR branch again.
I'll rerun the checks.
This PR improves coverage. Thank you!

@basfroman basfroman added the SDKv10 Use this label for issues and feature requests relevant to Bittensor SDK v10. label Dec 7, 2025
@basfroman basfroman merged commit 7815604 into opentensor:SDKv10 Dec 8, 2025
1212 checks passed
This was referenced Dec 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

SDKv10 Use this label for issues and feature requests relevant to Bittensor SDK v10.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants