Skip to content

test: fix feature_llmq_evo.py flakiness #6652

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 6, 2025
Merged

test: fix feature_llmq_evo.py flakiness #6652

merged 1 commit into from
May 6, 2025

Conversation

UdjinM6
Copy link

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 commented Apr 30, 2025

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

#6533 changed set_dash_llmq_test_params to adjust llmq_test_platform quorum params. We use this quorum type in feature_llmq_evo.py but we forgot to update arguments we pass into mine_quorum() accordingly and mine_quorum() switches dkg phases too fast now.

What was done?

Drop incorrect params.

How Has This Been Tested?

Run multiple feature_llmq_evo.py in parallel. Before this patch it would fail 50/50 for me.

Breaking Changes

n/a

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have assigned this pull request to a milestone (for repository code-owners and collaborators only)

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 added this to the 23 milestone Apr 30, 2025
@coderabbitai coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Apr 30, 2025

Walkthrough

The update modifies the run_test method within the LLMQEvoNodesTest class in the test/functional/feature_llmq_evo.py file. Specifically, it changes the invocation of the mine_quorum function. Previously, this function was called with several explicit parameters related to expected connections, members, contributions, complaints, justifications, and commitments. The revised code streamlines this call by providing only the quorum type name (llmq_test_platform) and its type identifier (106). All other detailed expectation parameters have been removed from the function call. The section of the test that verifies the quorum members as EvoNodes is left unmodified. No changes were made to the declarations of exported or public entities.

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 420615c and 9ac2579.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • test/functional/feature_llmq_evo.py (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code Graph Analysis (1)
test/functional/feature_llmq_evo.py (1)
test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py (1)
  • mine_quorum (1827-1913)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (10)
  • GitHub Check: mac-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_multiprocess-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_tsan-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_sqlite-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_ubsan-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_fuzz-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: win64-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_nowallet-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: arm-linux-build / Build source
🔇 Additional comments (1)
test/functional/feature_llmq_evo.py (1)

87-87: Good fix for the test flakiness issue.

This simplification of the mine_quorum() call resolves the flakiness issue described in the PR. By removing the explicit parameters for expected connections, members, contributions, complaints, justifications, and commitments, the function now uses its default values which better handle the timing of DKG phase transitions.

The previous implementation was causing DKG phases to switch too quickly, but now the test relies on the framework's built-in defaults that correctly align with the quorum parameters set for llmq_test_platform in set_dash_llmq_test_params.

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

PastaPastaPasta
PastaPastaPasta approved these changes May 1, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK 9ac2579

knst
knst approved these changes May 2, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ACK 9ac2579

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta merged commit 465c176 into dashpay:develop May 6, 2025
33 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@knst knst knst approved these changes

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
23
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@UdjinM6 @knst @PastaPastaPasta