admin/webrtc_m130
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fixed flaky StunRequestTests which depended on the wall clock

Browse Source 
StunRequestTests were using the real time clock to measure fairly large
retransmit intervals (up to several seconds). This was making the tests
slow and flaky when the system was heavily loaded.

See https://build.chromium.org/p/client.webrtc/builders/Win64%20Release/builds/9274/steps/rtc_unittests/logs/stdio
for an example of a recent failure.

This change makes the tests use a simulated clock instead. They are now
very quick, precise and reliable.

R=honghaiz@webrtc.org, zhihuang@webrtc.org

Review URL: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2300143005 .

Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#14097}
This commit is contained in:
skvlad 2016-09-06 17:17:17 -07:00
parent b460fd8b16
commit b9d8d10d42
1 changed files with 9 additions and 11 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

20
webrtc/p2p/base/stunrequest_unittest.cc
View File

@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
*/
#include "webrtc/p2p/base/stunrequest.h"
#include "webrtc/base/fakeclock.h"
#include "webrtc/base/gunit.h"
#include "webrtc/base/helpers.h"
#include "webrtc/base/logging.h"
@ -17,12 +18,6 @@
using namespace cricket;
// STUN timeout (with all retries) is 9500ms.
// Add some margin of error for slow bots.
// TODO(deadbeef): Use simulated clock instead of just increasing timeouts to
// fix flaky tests.
static const int kTimeoutMs = 15000;
class StunRequestTest : public testing::Test,
public sigslot::has_slots<> {
public:
@ -150,18 +145,19 @@ TEST_F(StunRequestTest, TestUnexpected) {
// Test that requests are sent at the right times, and that the 9th request
// (sent at 7900 ms) can be properly replied to.
TEST_F(StunRequestTest, TestBackoff) {
const int MAX_TIMEOUT_MS = 10000;
rtc::ScopedFakeClock fake_clock;
StunMessage* req = CreateStunMessage(STUN_BINDING_REQUEST, NULL);
int64_t start = rtc::TimeMillis();
manager_.Send(new StunRequestThunker(req, this));
StunMessage* res = CreateStunMessage(STUN_BINDING_RESPONSE, req);
for (int i = 0; i < 9; ++i) {
while (request_count_ == i)
rtc::Thread::Current()->ProcessMessages(1);
EXPECT_TRUE_SIMULATED_WAIT(request_count_ != i, MAX_TIMEOUT_MS, fake_clock);
int64_t elapsed = rtc::TimeMillis() - start;
LOG(LS_INFO) << "STUN request #" << (i + 1)
<< " sent at " << elapsed << " ms";
EXPECT_GE(TotalDelay(i + 1), elapsed);
EXPECT_EQ(TotalDelay(i), elapsed);
}
EXPECT_TRUE(manager_.CheckResponse(res));
@ -174,13 +170,15 @@ TEST_F(StunRequestTest, TestBackoff) {
// Test that we timeout properly if no response is received in 9500 ms.
TEST_F(StunRequestTest, TestTimeout) {
rtc::ScopedFakeClock fake_clock;
StunMessage* req = CreateStunMessage(STUN_BINDING_REQUEST, NULL);
StunMessage* res = CreateStunMessage(STUN_BINDING_RESPONSE, req);
manager_.Send(new StunRequestThunker(req, this));
rtc::Thread::Current()->ProcessMessages(kTimeoutMs);
EXPECT_FALSE(manager_.CheckResponse(res));
// Simulate the 9500 ms STUN timeout
SIMULATED_WAIT(false, 9500, fake_clock);
EXPECT_FALSE(manager_.CheckResponse(res));
EXPECT_TRUE(response_ == NULL);
EXPECT_FALSE(success_);
EXPECT_FALSE(failure_);