an owner whose process is gone is undetermined, not a proof about it (#1152)
fails intermittently on macOS, across unrelated pull requests.
Observed twice in one session, on two different branches and two different
shards, with no shared content:
bats (macos-latest 4/5) a windows-handshake test change
bats (macos-latest 5/5) a documentation and driver-entry change
Neither branch touches the proof layer. ubuntu passed both times.
This is filed as more than housekeeping because of what the test asserts. The
proof layer answers with four states, and this test pins the boundary between
two of them: an owner process that is gone must come back undetermined, not
as a proof about the pane. If that boundary moves under load, the failure
mode is not a red build — it is a proved that was never established, handed
to a caller that will write on the strength of it.
So the question this issue asks is not "why is the test flaky". It is:
- does the classifier depend on timing anywhere between observing the owner
pid and reporting the state, and
- if the observation races, which way does it fall — toward
undetermined
(safe) or toward a positive verdict (not safe)?
A test that flakes toward red may be sitting next to a path that flakes
toward a false positive. That is worth measuring directly rather than
inferring from the red.
Related: the combined-run diagnostics recently added to this suite print the
inner failures instead of discarding them, so the next occurrence should
carry more than a terminated sleep.
an owner whose process is gone is undetermined, not a proof about it (#1152)fails intermittently on macOS, across unrelated pull requests.
Observed twice in one session, on two different branches and two different
shards, with no shared content:
Neither branch touches the proof layer. ubuntu passed both times.
This is filed as more than housekeeping because of what the test asserts. The
proof layer answers with four states, and this test pins the boundary between
two of them: an owner process that is gone must come back
undetermined, notas a proof about the pane. If that boundary moves under load, the failure
mode is not a red build — it is a
provedthat was never established, handedto a caller that will write on the strength of it.
So the question this issue asks is not "why is the test flaky". It is:
pid and reporting the state, and
undetermined(safe) or toward a positive verdict (not safe)?
A test that flakes toward red may be sitting next to a path that flakes
toward a false positive. That is worth measuring directly rather than
inferring from the red.
Related: the combined-run diagnostics recently added to this suite print the
inner failures instead of discarding them, so the next occurrence should
carry more than a terminated sleep.