Skip to content
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

test_scheduler: remove the exact ordering assertion #2484

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

LEXUGE
Copy link
Contributor

@LEXUGE LEXUGE commented Jul 10, 2024

ARTIQ Pull Request

Description of Changes

Currently the exact ordering is compared in the pending_priorities test which is not necessary and is non-deterministic. This patch only asserts the middle priority experiment is ran before the high priority experiment scheduled in the future.

Related Issue

#1888
And it's also failing locally on my local nix develop

Type of Changes

Type
🐛 Bug fix

Steps (Choose relevant, delete irrelevant before submitting)

All Pull Requests

  • Use correct spelling and grammar.
  • Close/update issues.
  • Check the copyright situation of your changes and sign off your patches (git commit --signoff, see copyright).

Code Changes

Git Logistics

  • Split your contribution into logically separate changes (git rebase --interactive). Merge/squash/fixup commits that just fix or amend previous commits. Remove unintended changes & cleanup. See tutorial.
  • Write short & meaningful commit messages. Review each commit for messages (git show). Format:
    topic: description. < 50 characters total.
    
    Longer description. < 70 characters per line
    

Licensing

See copyright & licensing for more info.
ARTIQ files that do not contain a license header are copyrighted by M-Labs Limited and are licensed under LGPLv3+.

@dnadlinger
Copy link
Collaborator

There are #1920 and #1976 as well, but they seem to have fizzled out. This is the minimal fix that, for the specific issue tested here, has the equivalent effect (for the wrong ordering, the test would just hang for many hours/timeout anyway). As it retains the original intention from when I wrote the (sloppy) existing test, I'd say we just merge this now. #1976 would still be good to have for more complex scenarios, but if that becomes ready to merge, we can just replace the implementation from this PR wholesale – no extra work.

Currently the exact ordering is compared in the `pending_priorities`
test which is not necessary and is non-deterministic. This patch only
 asserts the middle priority experiment is ran before the high priority
 experiment scheduled in the future.

Signed-off-by: Kanyang Ying <[email protected]>
@dnadlinger
Copy link
Collaborator

Merged in 530f67f.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants