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

Revert 6bb8de5 to avoid breaking test_cxx_remote_services_integration. #654

Conversation

PengZheng
Copy link
Contributor

@PengZheng PengZheng commented Sep 24, 2023

IMHO, we should find out why 6bb8de5 breaks test_cxx_remote_services_integration, there seems something very unusual happens inside C++ RSA. TestExportImportRemoteServiceFactory seems buggy as explained here.

This PR can serve as a stop gap. The more involved design issue of TestExportImportRemoteServiceFactory should be addressed later.

@PengZheng PengZheng linked an issue Sep 24, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Sep 24, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #654 (da65fcf) into master (be8a413) will decrease coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head da65fcf differs from pull request most recent head 4e15eaf. Consider uploading reports for the commit 4e15eaf to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #654      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   81.68%   81.60%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files         260      260              
  Lines       34675    34680       +5     
==========================================
- Hits        28323    28300      -23     
- Misses       6352     6380      +28     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
libs/framework/src/framework.c 85.04% <100.00%> (-0.20%) ⬇️

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@rlenferink
Copy link
Member

rlenferink commented Sep 24, 2023

LGTM (tested locally and the test failure is solved)

@PengZheng
Copy link
Contributor Author

#653 turns out to be a design flaw of cxx_remote_services, not an issue of the framework.
So I will close this, and send another workaround PR for cxx_remote_services instead.

@PengZheng PengZheng closed this Sep 25, 2023
@PengZheng PengZheng deleted the hotfix/653-test_cxx_remote_services_integration-crash branch September 25, 2023 02:20
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.

3 participants