857636 - TinderboxPrints for crashes and leak failures broken by bug 855697

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Release Engineering :: General, defect)

Description

[Phil Ringnalda (:philor)]

In http://mxr.mozilla.org/build/source/mozharness/mozharness/mozilla/testing/unittest.py#106 we decide whether we hit a crash, a leak, or a failure to detect leaks, based on the first captured match in http://mxr.mozilla.org/build/source/mozharness/mozharness/mozilla/testing/errors.py#47

Bug 855697 changed full_regex to match both TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL and PROCESS-CRASH, but in the process changed full_harness_match.group(1) from being "application crashed" for a crash to being "PROCESS-CRASH", so now every full_regex match falls through and winds up TinderboxPrinting "LEAK", whether it's a crash or a failure to be able to detect leaks or an actual leak.

Comment 1

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

Whoops, sorry :-)

Comment 2

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

Attachment: buildbotcustom v1

Utter fail on my part on the first time round, sorry!

Comment 3

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

Attachment: mozharness v1

Comment 4

[Aki Sasaki (not active)]

Hunh, I'm not actually familiar with this construct.

By the summary, I would have guessed the fix would have been to remove "PROCESS-CRASH" from the regex entirely.  How will this solve it?

Comment 5

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

In various places, we check that the first group captured/matched by the regexp (ie 'foo_match.group(1)') is "application crashed", "bytes leaked..." etc.

By adding PROCESS-CRASH as part of a group in bug 855697, it bumped the matched group numbers up by one. We don't want to remove PROCESS-CRASH, since it's needed, therefore to fix I can either use '.group(2)' (but that risks me missing some consumers) or else make the newly added group non-capturing by using '(?:foo)', since we don't need the value later anyway.

Comment 6

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

Comment on attachment 732955 [details] [diff] [review]
mozharness v1

https://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbotcustom/rev/4cbab1ecb050
https://hg.mozilla.org/build/mozharness/rev/32d6a6c73123

Comment 7

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

in production

Comment 8

[Chris AtLee [:catlee]]

mozharness change didn't get merged to production...is this all working ok?

Comment 9

[Phil Ringnalda (:philor)]

Nope, it's not working, I just thought no part of it had been merged.

Comment 10

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

Sorry forgot we have a prod branch on mozharness, merged now.