[3.11] gh-102795: Fix use of poll in test_epoll's test_control_and_wait (GH-102796) #104173
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pythonGH-102796) This test can fail unnecessarily. In the test we wait for events on two file descriptors. This is done in a single call to select.epoll's poll() function. However, it is valid for the OS to return only one event via poll() and the next via a subsequent call to poll(). This rarely happens, but it can cause the test to fail despite properly functioning polling. Instead, we poll a second time when necessary. (cherry picked from commit c9ecd3e) Co-authored-by: Kevin Krakauer <[email protected]>
|
Oh, Python 3.11 tets.support doesn't have busy_wait(). I added it to Python 3.12. I don't think that this very specific test enhancement is needed for 3.11. It's an old test. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This test can fail unnecessarily. In the test we wait for events on two
file descriptors. This is done in a single call to select.epoll's poll()
function. However, it is valid for the OS to return only one event via
poll() and the next via a subsequent call to poll(). This rarely
happens, but it can cause the test to fail despite properly functioning
polling.
Instead, we poll a second time when necessary.
(cherry picked from commit c9ecd3e)
Co-authored-by: Kevin Krakauer [email protected]