-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.6k
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
Ensure timeout test handlers don't complete before timing out. #118539
Conversation
TestTimeoutRequestHeaders and TestTimeoutWithLogging are designed to catch data races on request headers and include an HTTP handler that triggers timeout then repeatedly mutates request headers. Sometimes, the request header mutation loop could complete before the timeout filter observed the timeout, resulting in a test failure. The mutation loop now runs until the test ends.
For #118523. |
/sig api-machinery |
/cc @tkashem |
/assign |
/lgtm |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 92f3ccf92f6afa7cf62a8de5ed756b4dbc938c99
|
/lgtm Thanks! |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: benluddy, wojtek-t The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What type of PR is this?
/kind flake
What this PR does / why we need it:
TestTimeoutRequestHeaders and TestTimeoutWithLogging are designed to catch data races on request headers and include an HTTP handler that triggers timeout then repeatedly mutates request headers. Sometimes, the request header mutation loop could complete before the timeout filter observed the timeout, resulting in a test failure. The mutation loop now runs until the test ends.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
I can no longer reproduce the flakes in either test using
golang.org/x/tools/cmd/stress
with this patch. Without the patch, I observed somewhere around a 1/1000 flake rate.Fix #118523.
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: