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.

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

tests: add tests for go/atomic2 #14975

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

tests: add tests for go/atomic2 #14975

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
11 changes: 11 additions & 0 deletions go/atomic2/atomic128_test.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -24,6 +24,17 @@ import (
)

func TestCompareAndSwap(t *testing.T) {
runCompareAndSwap(t)
}

func TestCompareAndSwapWriteBarrier(t *testing.T) {
writeBarrier.enabled = true
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This modifies global state and at least we need to revert it back at the end of the test, but it also could introduce risk for flaky tests if anything runs in parallel.

Also this links to runtime stuff, so I think we're tbh probably better off not adding this test here. Because this hooks into the Go runtime.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Maniktherana Maniktherana Jan 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see, this test was made just to cover this conditional. Is there a way to test it without modifying global state?

Copy link
Contributor

@dbussink dbussink Jan 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don’t think there’s a good way to test so I think we should skip trying to further test this.

Code coverage is a tool to find areas that might need more tests. It’s not a goal in itself to get to 100% coverage. That can have detrimental effects and this is one of those cases.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, I'll close this PR

require.True(t, writeBarrier.enabled, "writeBarrier should be enabled")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems like a very tautological tests and not really useful.


runCompareAndSwap(t)
}

func runCompareAndSwap(t *testing.T) {
i1 := new(int)
i2 := new(int)
n := &PointerAndUint64[int]{p: unsafe.Pointer(i1), u: 12345}
Expand Down
Loading