Resolved test failure of test_DSF_Reentrancy

[Pritamp99]

• This contribution adheres to CONTRIBUTING.md.

What does this Pull Request accomplish?

Changes: Skip "test_DSF_reentrancy"

Saved in LabVIEW 2021 64-bit.

Why should this Pull Request be merged?

It resolves the issue ERROR 1390 which was thrown because of out of Scope calling of a Top.vi.

Skipping the test for now.

What testing has been done?

• None

[buckd]

When I run the test locally, it still fails with the same error in LabVIEW 2021. Can you test it in 2021 and see if this fix works?

[buckd]

I went back and looked at when that test was added to the ATS (23.3 build 8). That test has never passed. It was added 4 years ago and, presumably, worked when it was added (#22) . But, there have been numerous changes to both VI Tester and LabVIEW, particularly related to classes and PPLs since then, so I'm not completely surprised by this. It was added as a check for the framework to be utilized with multiple instances in case someone wanted to use it outside the custom device.

In VeriStand, you can only add one instance of the custom device per target, so the case this test is checking is not a valid use case for VeriStand and I'm not aware of anyone using the framework outside the custom device. Given this information, I propose we either skip or delete this test.

[Pritamp99]

Skipped the "test_DSF_Reentrancy" for now.

[niveristand-diff-bot]

Bleep bloop!

LabVIEW Diff Robot here with some diffs served up hot for your pull request.

Notice something funny? Help fix me on my GitHub repo.

Reentrancy Tests.lvclass--test DSF Reentrancy.vi.png

[niveristand-diff-bot]

Bleep bloop!

LabVIEW Diff Robot here with some diffs served up hot for your pull request.

Notice something funny? Help fix me on my GitHub repo.

Reentrancy Tests.lvclass--test DSF Reentrancy.vi.png

[buckd]

Please update the description of the PR because it still says there were friend relationships added between the thread classes and that's not true anymore.