We have encountered an instance where the tracepoints were not collected in the same order they were fired (#31951).
Tracepoint ordering is not guaranteed in userspace for a number of reasons.
As this test does not require a strict collection/processing order collect expected and actual events into dicts and compare them.
This will gracefully handle both the number of events, and out-of-order events should they reoccur in the future.
Fixes: #31951
<!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
<!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->
For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/32101.
<!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->
See the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.
ACK 693d1e2f54baa0d5e407153f79b2f98385e6b8d9
I successfully ran the changed test a couple of times and the code changes look good to me.
That this behavior works as intended can be tested with this patch:
diff --git a/test/functional/interface_usdt_utxocache.py b/test/functional/interface_usdt_utxocache.py
index d4213d5020..94ec23c51a 100755
--- a/test/functional/interface_usdt_utxocache.py
+++ b/test/functional/interface_usdt_utxocache.py
@@ -326,6 +326,7 @@ class UTXOCacheTracepointTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
event.is_coinbase
)
+ expected_utxocache_adds.reverse()
expected_add_keys = {(e["txid"], e["index"], e["height"], e["value"], e["is_coinbase"])
for e in expected_utxocache_adds}
expected_spent_keys = {(e["txid"], e["index"], e["height"], e["value"], e["is_coinbase"])
315 | @@ -324,9 +316,26 @@ def handle_utxocache_spent(_, data, __): 316 | 317 | self.log.info( 318 | f"check that we successfully traced {EXPECTED_HANDLE_ADD_SUCCESS} adds and {EXPECTED_HANDLE_SPENT_SUCCESS} spent") 319 | - for expected_utxo, actual_event in zip(expected_utxocache_adds + expected_utxocache_spents, 320 | - actual_utxocache_adds + actual_utxocache_spents): 321 | - compare_utxo_with_event(expected_utxo, actual_event) 322 | +
Maybe add a comment about the events possible arriving out of order (to make it clear why this is done without the context of this PR).
Good idea. Added a comment in 248fdd88dcf651a0560a3eedfb8af61f38c61400
git range-diff 693d1e2f54baa0d5e407153f79b2f98385e6b8d9...248fdd88dcf651a0560a3eedfb8af61f38c61400
Thanks!
...interface_usdt_utxocache.py
We have encountered an instance where the tracepoints were not collected
in the same order they were fired (#31951).
Tracepoint ordering is not guaranteed in userspace for a number of
reasons.
As this test does not require a strict collection/processing order
collect `expected` and `actual` events into dicts and compare them.
This will gracefully handle both the number of events, and out-of-order
events should they reoccur in the future.
Code review ACK 248fdd88dcf651a0560a3eedfb8af61f38c61400
re-ACK 248fdd88dcf651a0560a3eedfb8af61f38c61400