Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34k
gh-104090: Update Resource Tracker to return exit code based on resource leaked found or not#106807
New issue
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
gh-104090: Update Resource Tracker to return exit code based on resource leaked found or not #106807
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
bityob commented Jul 16, 2023 • edited by pitrou
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited by pitrou
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
…r not and added tests for that
bedevere-bot commented Jul 16, 2023
Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Please add it using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Lib/test/_test_multiprocessing.py Outdated
| # Reset exit code value | ||
| _resource_tracker._exitcode=None | ||
| exit_code_assert=self.assertNotEqual |
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.
This is a bit confusing. Also, it will match any non-zero exit code which might not be desired (other problems may return some code not in {0, 1}). How about simply expected_exit_code = 0 if delete_queue else 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.
Hey,
I fixed the test and fixed the code too.
Since I saved the exit status (which was 256 when the exit code was 1),
so now the code saves the exit code and verifies it to 0/1
Thanks
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Lib/test/test_concurrent_futures.py Outdated
| runner=unittest.TextTestRunner() | ||
| result=runner.run(test_class('test_initializer')) | ||
| self.assertEqual(result.testsRun, 1) | ||
| self.assertEqual(result.failures, []) | ||
| self.assertEqual(result.errors, []) |
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.
Uhm, why not do the simple thing and add these checks somewhere in FailingInitializerMixin?
It should also avoid running those tests twice (which I assume this does).
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.
The result object exists when we run the test using Test Runner, which is not the case on FailingInitializerMixin.
This is used for safety, ensuring the inner test passed before we check the resource tracker
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.
Yes, but this is needlessly complex (and might interfere with other test options/customizations). Let's do the check at the end of said tests.
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.
@pitrou I don't understand how you want those checks to be since we can check it only after a test run with the returned result, which is not the case in regular tests. Anyway, I'm removing those checks since it's not mandatory and just for safety
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 honestly don't understand what the difficulty would be. You can make the resource tracker stop at the end of the test, or at the end of the testcase (in a teardown method for example).
… to convert from status code to exit code
…_concurrent_futures-v2
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Lib/test/_test_multiprocessing.py Outdated
| Test the exit code of the resource tracker based on if there were left leaked resources when we stop the process. | ||
| If not leaked resources were found, exit code should be 0, otherwise 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.
Thanks for the comment. Nit, but can you please ensure the line length remains reasonable (say < 80 characters) ? This can otherwise be annoying when reading/reviewing code.
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.
Yes, I'll fix it. I'm used to 120 chars line length...
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core and Builtins/2023-07-16-15-02-47.gh-issue-104090.oMjNa9.rst Outdated Show resolvedHide resolved
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
sunmy2019 commented Jul 19, 2023
We should get #106795 merged first to pass the test. |
Lib/test/test_concurrent_futures.py Outdated
| runner=unittest.TextTestRunner() | ||
| runner.run(test_class('test_initializer')) |
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.
Again, can you please instead put these checks directly in FailingInitializerMixin?
For example, add a tearDown method:
deftearDown(self): super().tearDown() # shutdown executorifself.mp_contextandself.mp_context.get_start_method() in ("spawn", "forkserver"): # Stop resource tracker manually now, so we can verify there are# not leaked resources by checking the process exit codefrommultiprocessing.resource_trackerimport_resource_tracker_resource_tracker._stop() self.assertEqual(_resource_tracker._exitcode, 0)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.
@pitrou Checking
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.
Doesn't work
$ ./python -m unittest test.test_concurrent_futures.ProcessPoolForkserverFailingInitializerTest -v test_initializer (test.test_concurrent_futures.ProcessPoolForkserverFailingInitializerTest.test_initializer) ... /home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/resource_tracker.py:236: UserWarning: resource_tracker: There appear to be 3 leaked semaphore objects to clean up at shutdown warnings.warn('resource_tracker: There appear to be %d ' FAIL Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/util.py", line 300, in _run_finalizers finalizer() File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/util.py", line 224, in __call__ res = self._callback(*self._args, **self._kwargs) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/synchronize.py", line 87, in _cleanup sem_unlink(name) FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/util.py", line 300, in _run_finalizers finalizer() File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/util.py", line 224, in __call__ res = self._callback(*self._args, **self._kwargs) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/synchronize.py", line 87, in _cleanup sem_unlink(name) FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/util.py", line 300, in _run_finalizers finalizer() File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/util.py", line 224, in __call__ res = self._callback(*self._args, **self._kwargs) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/multiprocessing/synchronize.py", line 87, in _cleanup sem_unlink(name) FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory ====================================================================== FAIL: test_initializer (test.test_concurrent_futures.ProcessPoolForkserverFailingInitializerTest.test_initializer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/user/cpython/Lib/test/test_concurrent_futures.py", line 298, in tearDown self.assertEqual(_resource_tracker._exitcode, 0) AssertionError: 1 != 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 1 test in 0.269s FAILED (failures=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.
Hmm, too bad :-(
…_concurrent_futures-v2
…_concurrent_futures-v2
bityob commented Aug 3, 2023
@pitrou |
pitrou commented Aug 31, 2023
@bityob Sorry for the delay. There were some recent changes in git main that are causing conflicts. Could you merge from main and fix the conflicts? Thank you! |
…est_concurrent_futures.py) to new location (Lib/test/test_concurrent_futures/test_init.py)
…_futures-v2' of github.com:bityob/cpython into pythongh-104090-fix-leaked-semaphors-on-test_concurrent_futures-v2
bityob commented Aug 31, 2023
pitrou left a comment
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.
Thanks @bityob for the update. LGTM now, let's wait for CI.
pitrou commented Sep 19, 2023
Unfortunately there are CI failures which look related. Can you take a look? |
bityob commented Sep 21, 2023
Yes, thanks. I'll check |
…_concurrent_futures-v2
encukou commented Feb 5, 2024
I'd love to be able to tell whether ResourceTracker was successful, but testing it on the “live” global |
…urceTracker instance Add a new 'dummy' resource, which has no side-effects when cleaned up. The ResourceTracker test then registers this 'dummy', and either unregisters it or not.
encukou commented Feb 13, 2024
My continuation of this PR is here: #115410 |
This builds on #106807, which adds a return code to ResourceTracker, to make future debugging easier. Testing this “in situ” proved difficult, since the global ResourceTracker is involved in test infrastructure. So, the tests here create a new instance and feed it fake data. --------- Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <yonatan.bitton@perception-point.io> Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <bityob@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Antoine Pitrou <antoine@python.org>
encukou commented Feb 21, 2024
I've merged the continuation PR. |
Pull request was closed
…thonGH-115410) This builds on python#106807, which adds a return code to ResourceTracker, to make future debugging easier. Testing this “in situ” proved difficult, since the global ResourceTracker is involved in test infrastructure. So, the tests here create a new instance and feed it fake data. --------- Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <yonatan.bitton@perception-point.io> Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <bityob@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Antoine Pitrou <antoine@python.org>
…thonGH-115410) This builds on python#106807, which adds a return code to ResourceTracker, to make future debugging easier. Testing this “in situ” proved difficult, since the global ResourceTracker is involved in test infrastructure. So, the tests here create a new instance and feed it fake data. --------- Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <yonatan.bitton@perception-point.io> Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <bityob@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Antoine Pitrou <antoine@python.org>
…thonGH-115410) This builds on python#106807, which adds a return code to ResourceTracker, to make future debugging easier. Testing this “in situ” proved difficult, since the global ResourceTracker is involved in test infrastructure. So, the tests here create a new instance and feed it fake data. --------- Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <yonatan.bitton@perception-point.io> Co-authored-by: Yonatan Bitton <bityob@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Antoine Pitrou <antoine@python.org>
collectedDurationsand verified that it fails without the fixShow output
resource_tracker.pybased on the cleanup result, so we can check what was the result