From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp46.i.mail.ru (smtp46.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.106])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E5FF469719
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 29 Oct 2020 21:06:27 +0300 (MSK)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 21:06:52 +0300
From: Alexander Turenko <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <20201029180652.pn2myjqbnfambevo@tkn_work_nb>
References: <20201028162212.1550-1-sergos@tarantool.org>
 <c5737a81-bfab-91f9-e0de-81956e7010c2@tarantool.org>
 <20201029171437.GA517@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201029171437.GA517@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] lua: handle fiber cancellation for
	fiber.cond
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Sergey Ostanevich <sergos@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 08:14:37PM +0300, Sergey Ostanevich wrote:
> Hi Oleg!
> 
> Thanks for the comment, I believe I have to resend the patch along with
> C API changes.
> 
> What I see at the moment - failures like 
> 
> [076]  test_run:wait_upstream(1, {message_re = 'Missing %.xlog file',
> status = 'loading'})
> [076]  ---
> [076] -- true
> [076] +- false
> 
> which incurred by the intended behavior change, AFAIU. We no longer
> return 'true' in case the fiber is cancelled. The wait_upstream returns
> the cond wait result, hence the output differs.

It just a loop with sleeps. I don't see any relation to your change. If
the fail is stable, it should be the reason to investigate it.

If it is actually intended behaviour change (I doubt that it is so), you
should fix the test.