-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18k
net/http: TestTransportGCRequest failures #56809
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
Comments
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2022-11-16 15:10 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@70f585f0 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
It appears this test was last updated in https://go.dev/cl/438137 (attn @neild). |
This doesn't seem likely to be caused by https://go.dev/cl/438137, which refactored the way the test is invoked and its name but not the content of the test. The test sends an HTTP request, waits 100ms, calls runtime.GC, waits 4900ms, and fails if the request has not been finalized. Possibly a sufficiently slow builder could result in the request not being GCd within the time limit? I'm currently unable to create a freebsd-riscv64-unmatched gomote to test. Going to leave this alone for now to collect more data. |
“sufficiently slow builder” seems plausible. Would it make sense to remove the arbitrary 5s timeout? If the request is truly pinned by a reachable |
Dropping the timeout might be reasonable. Although I'm a bit confused why it would be necessary, since Let's see if any other flakes show up, and on what builders. |
Finalizers aren't guaranteed to run at any given point relative to the GC cycle; IIRC they only start running at the end of the cycle in which the object becomes unreachable. And sometimes they can take arbitrarily many cycles to clear — for example, a chain of N objects with a finalizer set at each link of the chain will have N GC cycles of latency before the last finalizer can run. So in general a test that uses finalizers to check for leaks has to be prepared for arbitrary latency. Making matters even worse, if the allocation is small enough to fit into the tiny allocator, its finalizer might not ever run if some unrelated tiny allocation pins the block. (But wouldn't expect an |
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2022-12-01 18:11 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@36b87f27 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2022-12-05 20:45 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@a5b10be4 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2022-12-07 16:09 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@7ed50cfd net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2022-12-14 19:12 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@ffefcd36 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2022-12-21 03:49 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@78fc8107 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-01-21 21:08 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@ba913774 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-01-20 05:01 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@8354f6b5 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2023-02-01 19:47 linux-amd64-race go@ab0f0459 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2023-02-01 21:30 darwin-amd64-race go@4b7f7eef net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
The |
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-03-24 00:44 darwin-amd64-nocgo go@d633f4b9 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-04-06 22:46 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@4f4a9c7f net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-05-09 18:03 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@fffddce5 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-04-18 16:26 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@c9d5df08 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-05-24 00:48 darwin-amd64-13 go@e4d95d0d net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-05-30 19:27 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@348fd638 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-05-31 22:48 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@1079a5c0 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-06-13 03:06 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@b0e1707f net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-05-31 15:17 netbsd-arm64-bsiegert go@125c2cac net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-06-28 02:41 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@a3093eca net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-07-19 11:55 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@5fe3f0a2 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-07-20 16:57 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@2b82d70f net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-07-31 18:33 linux-s390x-ibm go@bac4e2f2 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-08-07 18:49 linux-s390x-ibm go@78af0bbc net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-08-12 03:56 linux-s390x-ibm go@ac64a362 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2023-08-12 03:56 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@ac64a362 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
2023-08-14 15:41 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@c6ee8e31 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-08-21 21:48 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@47645420 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-08-23 19:03 freebsd-riscv64-unmatched go@738d2d90 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-08-22 19:18 linux-s390x-ibm go@fbcf43c6 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-08-22 19:18 linux-s390x-ibm go@88a6df72 net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Change https://go.dev/cl/522615 mentions this issue: |
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-08-24 17:52 linux-s390x-ibm-race go@5374c1aa net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Found new dashboard test flakes for:
2023-09-21 22:21 freebsd-arm-paulzhol go@9bec49cf net/http.TestTransportGCRequest (log)
|
Issue created automatically to collect these failures.
Example (log):
— watchflakes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: