python_testing: generate controller's nodeid and shutdown subscription #34231
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
doublemis1
commented
Jul 8, 2024
•
doublemis1
commented
- implementation of generate_random_node_id with exculdes values, the method add possibilty to run multiple test cases within one test session (the controllers' nodeid is the same for new controller in different test cases)
- ACE-1.2 script update: shutdown scubscriptions
|
PR #34231: Size comparison from 6e31453 to 9038d6d Full report (85 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink, tizen)
|
Comment on lines
1497
to
1499
| # Usage of new implementation of ChipDeviceController cause the necessary to not use asyncio.run, | ||
| # because the initialization of `asyncio.Lock` use the `asyncio.get_event_loop()` on init. | ||
| # Usage of `asyncio.run()` and `asyncio.get_event_loop()` are exclusive. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's not 100% clear why this change is needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The usage of asyncio.run() and asyncio.get_event_loop() are mutually exclusive.
In python 3.9.18 creation of asyncio.Lock call asyncio.get_event_loop():
https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/3.9/Lib/asyncio/locks.py#L81
Example of reproduction:
import asyncio
async def hello():
print("hello")
lock_1 = asyncio.Lock()
asyncio.run(hello())
lock_2 = asyncio.Lock()
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that I will fix that issue on my side, while using the scripts.
Since it should be an issue in the Python 3.9 and older version.
| def generate_random_nodeid(excluded_nodeid: typing.Optional[typing.List] = None) -> int: | ||
| if excluded_nodeid: | ||
| while True: | ||
| node_id=random.randint(0, 2^64-1) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Node ID 0 is not allowed (it means "unspecified").
There are some forbidden node IDs in the 0xFFFF_FFFx_xxxx_xxxx.
Also 2^64 is incorrect Python syntax and will lead to a very small number (66). Correct syntax is 2**64.
Suggested change
| node_id=random.randint(0, 2^64-1) | |
| node_id=random.randint(1, 0xFFFF_FFEF_FFFF_FFFF) |
The above suggestion is spec compliant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for comment.
your suggestion has been applied
Comment on lines
1509
to
1510
| else: | ||
| return random.randint(0, 2^64-1) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Refactor loop not to need a repeated random.randint by just generating until "not invalid".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done, used as recursive function
andy31415
reviewed
Jul 8, 2024
| # Usage of new implementation of ChipDeviceController cause the necessary to not use asyncio.run, | ||
| # because the initialization of `asyncio.Lock` use the `asyncio.get_event_loop()` on init. | ||
| # Usage of `asyncio.run()` and `asyncio.get_event_loop()` are exclusive. | ||
| loop = asyncio.get_event_loop() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio-eventloop.html#asyncio.get_event_loop says "deprecated since version 3.12" and documentation recommends to use alternatives.
I also am not very clear on what is going on based on the above comment and worry about the deprecation and warnings in the python documentation. Would it be correct to use get_running_loop for example?
Or is this code really needing to handle both coroutine vs non-coroutine use cases?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removed change from the PR, the issue is visible on specific version of Python (Python 3.9.x and older), mentioned here #34231 (comment).
andy31415
reviewed
Jul 8, 2024
| loop = asyncio.get_event_loop() | ||
| return loop.run_until_complete(awaitable) | ||
|
|
||
| def generate_random_nodeid(excluded_nodeid: typing.Optional[typing.List] = None) -> int: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
List is not ideal, maybe Set would be better.
Why not set the default to an empty set, and then you do not need to handle None and everything can go through the same while True branch.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Function updated. As you suggested change the type of the excluded_nodeid, it suits better.
doublemis1
force-pushed
the
update_the_usage_of_asyncio
branch
from
9038d6d to
00f40c0
Compare
doublemis1
changed the title
doublemis1
force-pushed
the
update_the_usage_of_asyncio
branch
from
00f40c0 to
fa4d1cf
Compare
|
PR #34231: Size comparison from 90310f2 to fa4d1cf Full report (85 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink, tizen)
|
* implementation of generate_random_node_id with exculdes values, the method add possibilty to run multiple test cases within one test session (the controllers' nodeid is the same for new controller in different test cases) * ACE-1.2 script update: shutdown scubscriptions Signed-off-by: Michał Szablowski <[email protected]>
doublemis1
force-pushed
the
update_the_usage_of_asyncio
branch
from
fa4d1cf to
26e8cfb
Compare
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
andyg-apple,
anush-apple,
arkq,
axelnxp,
bauerschwan,
bzbarsky-apple,
carol-apple,
cecille,
chapongatien,
chrisdecenzo,
chshu,
chulspro and
cliffamzn
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
kpschoedel,
ksperling-apple,
lazarkov,
lpbeliveau-silabs,
LuDuda,
mhazley,
mkardous-silabs,
nivi-apple,
p0fi,
pidarped,
plauric,
rcasallas-silabs,
ReneJosefsen,
robszewczyk,
saurabhst,
selissia,
sharadb-amazon,
tecimovic,
tima-q,
tobiasgraf,
turon,
vivien-apple,
wiba-nordic,
woody-apple,
younghak-hwang,
yufengwangca and
yunhanw-google
|
PR #34231: Size comparison from 9306418 to 26e8cfb Full report (85 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink, tizen)
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.