Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

On Oct 28, 2021, at 3:56 AM, Torsten Bögershausen via Core-talk <core-talk at aps.anl.gov> wrote:

Digging into the last "Build failed" messages
(thanks to Karl for reminding me)
It seems as if there is a problem with this test case:

not ok 54 - dbGetField("li2", 5) -> 3 == 0

And sometimes problems with packages.chocolatey.org, see further down.

Are there any good ideas, what could be done about the
dbGetField("li2", 5) -> 3 == 0
failure ?

Disable it under Windows ?
Retry, if it failed ?
Add a sleep?
sleep & retry if it failed ?
Any other good ideas ?

I think both Michael and I prefer that we find a way to fix the test code so it waits for the event properly, adding sleeps just causes test runs to take longer on systems where they delay isn’t generally required, and you never really know how long you need to wait for. There’s something about the Appveyor VM which causes it to schedule threads in unusual ways, and that’s probably a good thing for our tests in the long run — it makes us get them right.

I just took another look at the failure and I think I have a fix:

index 387ee7299..7bb8df7f4 100644

--- a/modules/database/test/std/rec/regressLinkSevr.db

+++ b/modules/database/test/std/rec/regressLinkSevr.db

@@ -6,11 +6,10 @@ record(stringin, "si1") {

 }

 record(longin, "li1") {

   field(INP, "ai.SEVR")

-  field(FLNK, "si2")

 }

 

 record(stringin, "si2") {

-  field(INP, "ai.SEVR CA")

+  field(INP, "ai.SEVR CP")

   field(FLNK, "li2")

 }

 record(longin, "li2") {

The test is already waiting for the cnt record to process before it checks the ENUM values. The above change ensures that the two records which read the SEVR field over CA won’t actually process until the update has arrived, so the return from testMonitorWait() will be delayed appropriately. This also means the call to dbCaSync() is no longer required:

index 95217043d..7580a3402 100644

--- a/modules/database/test/std/rec/regressTest.c

+++ b/modules/database/test/std/rec/regressTest.c

@@ -197,7 +197,6 @@ void testLinkSevr(void)

 

     testdbPutFieldOk("si1.PROC", DBF_LONG, 1);

     testMonitorWait(mon);

-    dbCaSync(); /* wait for update */

 

     testdbGetFieldEqual("si1", DBF_STRING, "INVALID");

     testdbGetFieldEqual("li1", DBF_LONG, INVALID_ALARM);

I will commit and push these changes now and we’ll see if that solves it.

- Andrew