On Thu, 25 Sep 2025 16:31:31 GMT, Daniel Fuchs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi, >> >> The H3ServerPushTest.java has been observed failing once in the CI on a >> personal job. >> Analysis reveals that the test actually passed, but the timeout handler >> killed the test. >> >> >> SUCCESSFUL >> H3ServerPushTest::testExcessivePushResponsesWithDistinctIdsInOneResponse >> 'testExcessivePushResponsesWithDistinctIdsInOneResponse(TestInfo)' [2840ms] >> >> [ JUnit Containers: found 4, started 4, succeeded 4, failed 0, aborted 0, >> skipped 0] >> [ JUnit Tests: found 17, started 17, succeeded 17, failed 0, aborted 0, >> skipped 0] >> >> JavaTest Message: Test complete. >> ... >> result: Error. "junit" action timed out with a timeout of 120 seconds on >> agent 23 >> >> test result: Error. "junit" action timed out with a timeout of 120 seconds >> on agent 23 >> >> >> This is probably attributable to the change of timeoutFactor to >> timeoutFactor=1, this change proposes to use othervm double the default >> timeout for that test to `/othervm/timeout=240` . > > Daniel Fuchs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Really change timeout Hello Daniel, this looks OK to me, but is the addition of `othervm` intentional? The PR description seems to suggest it is, but I couldn't see why that would be needed. ------------- Marked as reviewed by jpai (Reviewer). PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27492#pullrequestreview-3282829642
