Project: chromium Issues People Development process History Sign in
New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.
Issue 709067 "base_unittests" is flaky
Starred by 2 users Project Member Reported by chromium...@appspot.gserviceaccount.com, Apr 6 Back to list
Status: Assigned
Owner:
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: iOS
Pri: 2
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment
"base_unittests" is flaky.

This issue was created automatically by the chromium-try-flakes app. Please find the right owner to fix the respective test/step and assign this issue to them. If the step/test is infrastructure-related, please add Infra-Troopers label and change issue status to Untriaged. When done, please remove the issue from Sheriff Bug Queue by removing the Sheriff-Chromium label.

We have detected 3 recent flakes. List of all flakes can be found at https://chromium-try-flakes.appspot.com/all_flake_occurrences?key=ahVzfmNocm9taXVtLXRyeS1mbGFrZXNyGQsSBUZsYWtlIg5iYXNlX3VuaXR0ZXN0cww.

The chromium-try-flakes app is able to file bugs for individual tests when the test launcher is uploading results to the Test Results Server. If recent flakes above are caused by failing tests and you would like to have them filed as invidual bugs, please read more at https://goo.gl/eB0GLj.

This flaky test/step was previously tracked in  issue 706961 .
 
I see that the failure only seems to happen on ios-simulator

I have trouble understanding what exactly is flaky here.  In the end (*) all the tests pass, but there are a bunch of assert failures in logging tests (not all of them are the same).  Example failures below:

Failure #1:

[ RUN      ] LoggingTest.CheckStreamsAreLazy
[6716:1027:0406/081856.759095:5155359844001:FATAL:logging_unittest.cc(197)] Check failed: !mock_log_source.Log(). check message: Error 22 while retrieving error 316
0   base_unittests                      0x000000010c9bb03d base::debug::StackTrace::StackTrace(unsigned long) + 157
1   base_unittests                      0x000000010c9bb0bd base::debug::StackTrace::StackTrace(unsigned long) + 29
2   base_unittests                      0x000000010c9b97bc base::debug::StackTrace::StackTrace() + 28
3   base_unittests                      0x000000010ca3d150 logging::LogMessage::~LogMessage() + 80
4   base_unittests                      0x000000010ca3ae45 logging::LogMessage::~LogMessage() + 21
5   base_unittests                      0x000000010ca3e6d5 logging::ErrnoLogMessage::~ErrnoLogMessage() + 101
6   base_unittests                      0x000000010ca3e6f5 logging::ErrnoLogMessage::~ErrnoLogMessage() + 21
7   base_unittests                      0x000000010bc3fea4 logging::(anonymous namespace)::LoggingTest_CheckStreamsAreLazy_Test::TestBody() + 644

Failure #2:

[ RUN      ] LoggingTest.Dcheck
[6716:1027:0406/081856.815340:5155416071711:FATAL:logging_unittest.cc(407)] Check failed: false.
0   base_unittests                      0x000000010c9bb03d base::debug::StackTrace::StackTrace(unsigned long) + 157
1   base_unittests                      0x000000010c9bb0bd base::debug::StackTrace::StackTrace(unsigned long) + 29
2   base_unittests                      0x000000010c9b97bc base::debug::StackTrace::StackTrace() + 28
3   base_unittests                      0x000000010ca3d150 logging::LogMessage::~LogMessage() + 80
4   base_unittests                      0x000000010ca3ae45 logging::LogMessage::~LogMessage() + 21
5   base_unittests                      0x000000010bc4158c logging::(anonymous namespace)::LoggingTest_Dcheck_Test::TestBody() + 1340


(*) https://luci-logdog.appspot.com/v/?s=chromium%2Fbb%2Ftryserver.chromium.mac%2Fios-simulator%2F188490%2F%2B%2Frecipes%2Fsteps%2Fbase_unittests__iPhone_6s_Plus_iOS_10.0_%2F0%2Fstdout
Cc: hjd@chromium.org
+hjd@ in case this is similar to (or a duplicate of)  issue 706961 
Cc: lukasza@chromium.org ellyjo...@chromium.org
I see that there are only a handful of asserts failures and they only happen in the following testcases (*):
- LoggingTest.CheckStreamsAreLazy
- LoggingTest.Dcheck

So - maybe to get rid of this bug from the Chromium-tree-sheriff-queue, I can just disable these tests on ios?  Hmmm...  Let me put together a CL for this and see what other people say.

(*) at least when I look at the following runs:
- https://luci-logdog.appspot.com/v/?s=chromium%2Fbb%2Ftryserver.chromium.mac%2Fios-simulator%2F188482%2F%2B%2Frecipes%2Fsteps%2Fbase_unittests__iPhone_6s_Plus_iOS_10.0_%2F0%2Fstdout
- https://luci-logdog.appspot.com/v/?s=chromium%2Fbb%2Ftryserver.chromium.mac%2Fios-simulator%2F188490%2F%2B%2Frecipes%2Fsteps%2Fbase_unittests__iPhone_6s_Plus_iOS_10.0_%2F0%2Fstdout
- https://luci-logdog.appspot.com/v/?s=chromium%2Fbb%2Ftryserver.chromium.mac%2Fios-simulator%2F188480%2F%2B%2Frecipes%2Fsteps%2Fbase_unittests__iPhone_6s_Plus_iOS_10.0_%2F0%2Fstdout
Cc: akalin@chromium.org
Status: Available
+akalin@, which AFAICT (via git blame) authored the 2 tests from #c3
Labels: OS-iOS
Hmm, see also  issue 694655  which had the similar failure as #2 and also had problems on iOS and ended with the test being disabled.
Project Member Comment 7 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Apr 6
The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/ae6770cfd397cc0bc1de10cd557ba1ff59e3bea8

commit ae6770cfd397cc0bc1de10cd557ba1ff59e3bea8
Author: lukasza <lukasza@chromium.org>
Date: Thu Apr 06 19:05:11 2017

Disable LoggingTest.CheckStreamsAreLazy/Dcheck tests due to flakiness.

BUG=709067
TBR=danakj@chromium.org

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2804943004
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#462569}

[modify] https://crrev.com/ae6770cfd397cc0bc1de10cd557ba1ff59e3bea8/base/logging_unittest.cc

Labels: -Sheriff-Chromium
Let me remove the Sheriff-Chromium label, since after #c7 the tests should be disabled on iOS.
Cc: -hjd@chromium.org
Labels: -Pri-1 Pri-2
Owner: hjd@chromium.org
Status: Assigned
hjd@, would you mind taking over this bug?  I am shooting in the dark a little bit, so feel free to reassign as appropriate.

(also - in #c8 I probably should have lowered the priority)
Sign in to add a comment