#7613 PR-CI considers unexpected passes as success
Closed: fixed 5 years ago Opened 5 years ago by cheimes.

PR-CI doesn't mark a test run with unexpected passes as failed. For example test_installation.py::TestInstallWithCA_DNS1::()::test_replica0_ca_less_install from http://freeipa-org-pr-ci.s3-website.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/jobs/9369fcca-7f18-11e8-aae8-fa163ef99e01/report.html is a XPassed.


Another example: http://freeipa-org-pr-ci.s3-website.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/jobs/59805778-83d4-11e8-9987-fa163e430211/report.html for fedora-28/test_installation_TestInstallWithCA1 has 8 unexpected passes, e.g. test_installation.py::TestInstallWithCA1::()::test_replica2_ipa_dns_install.

FreeIPA's test suite is using xfail to mark tests as known failures. A failing test doesn't cause the test suite to fail. Instead it's recored as XFAIL (expected failure). It's also possible that an xfail test passes, Pytest calls this XPASS (unexpected pass). PR-CI doesn't consider an unexpected pass as an error.

With @pytest.mark.xfail(strict=True), pytest turns an XPASS into an error. See https://pytest.readthedocs.io/en/reorganize-docs/new-docs/user/xfail.html for more details

Metadata Update from @cheimes:
- Issue assigned to cheimes

5 years ago

Metadata Update from @cheimes:
- Custom field on_review adjusted to https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/2131

5 years ago

master:

  • 0c1010d Mark all expected failures as strict
  • ec65590 Fix XPASS in test_installation

Metadata Update from @cheimes:
- Issue close_status updated to: fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

5 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata