* (no subject)
@ 2011-03-29 13:03 dsmich
2011-03-29 21:47 ` Failures in ‘threads.test’ Ludovic Courtès
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: dsmich @ 2011-03-29 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bug-guile
With guile at v2.0.0-134-g38c50a9, I'm getting a couple of failures in threads.test on my single core Debian Squeeze machine:
FAIL: threads.test: lock-mutex: timed locking succeeds if mutex unlocked within timeout
FAIL: threads.test: mutex-ownership: mutex with owner not retained (bug #27450)
Running just the threads.test *sometimes* works. One in six runs or so.
-Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Failures in ‘threads.test’
2011-03-29 13:03 (no subject) dsmich
@ 2011-03-29 21:47 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-03-30 1:27 ` dsmich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2011-03-29 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bug-guile
Hi Dale,
An easy answer, but there’s some truth in it:
<dsmich@roadrunner.com> writes:
> With guile at v2.0.0-134-g38c50a9, I'm getting a couple of failures in threads.test on my single core Debian Squeeze machine:
>
> FAIL: threads.test: lock-mutex: timed locking succeeds if mutex unlocked within timeout
This one may be sensitive to load. Can you try changing
(+ (current-time) 2) to (+ (current-time) 5)?
> FAIL: threads.test: mutex-ownership: mutex with owner not retained (bug #27450)
This one is GC-sensitive. It’s already kludged at length to improve the
chances of success, but I don’t know how to improve the situation. It
could throw unresolved instead of failing, but that doesn’t really
help...
Thanks,
Ludo’.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Failures in ‘threads.test’
2011-03-29 21:47 ` Failures in ‘threads.test’ Ludovic Courtès
@ 2011-03-30 1:27 ` dsmich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: dsmich @ 2011-03-30 1:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ludovic Courtès, bug-guile
---- "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> Hi Dale,
Greetings. Thanks for taking a look. And for adding a Subject: (oops!)
> An easy answer, but there’s some truth in it:
>
> <dsmich@roadrunner.com> writes:
>
> > With guile at v2.0.0-134-g38c50a9, I'm getting a couple of failures in threads.test on my single core Debian Squeeze machine:
> >
> > FAIL: threads.test: lock-mutex: timed locking succeeds if mutex unlocked within timeout
>
> This one may be sensitive to load. Can you try changing
> (+ (current-time) 2) to (+ (current-time) 5)?
Still failing. Ok I take that back. There was two places with (+ (current-time) 2). After changing the other one it is *not* failing.
diff --git a/test-suite/tests/threads.test b/test-suite/tests/threads.test
index 2ffffb5..ba0a2a1 100644
--- a/test-suite/tests/threads.test
+++ b/test-suite/tests/threads.test
@@ -213,7 +213,7 @@
(signal-condition-variable c)
(unlock-mutex cm)
(lock-mutex m
- (+ (current-time) 2))))))
+ (+ (current-time) 5))))))
(lock-mutex m)
(wait-condition-variable c cm)
(unlock-mutex cm)
> > FAIL: threads.test: mutex-ownership: mutex with owner not retained (bug #27450)
>
> This one is GC-sensitive. It’s already kludged at length to improve the
> chances of success, but I don’t know how to improve the situation. It
> could throw unresolved instead of failing, but that doesn’t really
> help...
This message I think I never see when running the test directly. Only with "make check" do I see it. Yeah, three times in a row with make check, never with ./check-guile threads.test.
I'm running 7.2alpha5 libgc. From that tarball I think, not cvs.
-Dale
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-30 1:27 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-29 13:03 (no subject) dsmich
2011-03-29 21:47 ` Failures in ‘threads.test’ Ludovic Courtès
2011-03-30 1:27 ` dsmich
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).