test: hide segfault #2559
test: hide segfault #2559
Conversation
|
I can get this to trigger standalone, but it doesn't seem to trigger in pytest (locally too). I think it fails on exit, so number of times this runs may not matter, and that might be why pytest doesn't fail when it's not in a separate process. |
tests/test_gil_scoped.py
Outdated
| @@ -97,3 +97,9 @@ def test_python_to_cpp_to_python_from_process(): | |||
| def test_cross_module_gil(): | |||
| """Makes sure that the GIL can be acquired by another module from a GIL-released state.""" | |||
| m.test_cross_module_gil() # Should not raise a SIGSEGV | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| # Checks for segfault | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
# Attempts to generate non-deterministic Python 3.9 MacOS segfault.
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, though I probably will just pull this one experimental test; having our tests fail due to this, now that 3.9 is out, is probably not a good idea as long as we are actively trying to solve the issue. And this isn't breaking the tests anyway...
tests/test_gil_scoped.py
Outdated
|
|
||
|
|
||
| # Checks for segfault | ||
| def test_potential_segfault(): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could port just this test to unittest, so that I can run it with our sanitizers (ASAN, MSAN, TSAN).
Does that sound like a useful idea?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes yes yes! Just running it in plain Python does cause a segfault ~50% of the time (possibly regardless of the number of times it runs). There are no actual asserts here, so should be trivial to run.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(The single file I posted in the issue fails by itself if run directly; you just need to put it in the right place to load the cpp output module).
henryiii
force-pushed
the
tests/hideseg
branch
from
3818c49
to
261fc65
Compare
henryiii
force-pushed
the
tests/hideseg
branch
from
261fc65
to
2ac7cbd
Compare
|
Made this just not run the segfaulting tests, so we can see more green checkmarks. The bug is being investigated separately in #2559. |
|
I think the problem is more serious than first expected. The segfault happens when the process is cleaning up. For these examples, since it runs in a separate process, the return code of "-11" means the process segfaulted. But the thing causing the segfault can be other places, too, since this still segfaults at the end. I can try disabling the whole test, and hope that it's just that final test that's causing the issue. |
Trying to trigger segfault in main process. See #2558 .