-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
itest: fix FEVM tests for upstream changes #10193
Conversation
@@ -151,19 +151,19 @@ func TestFEVMRecursive2(t *testing.T) { | |||
} | |||
|
|||
// TestFEVMBasic does a basic fevm contract installation and invocation | |||
// recursive delegate call succeeds up to 238 times | |||
// recursive delegate call succeeds up to 228 times | |||
func TestFEVMRecursiveDelegatecall(t *testing.T) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This test isn't making a lot of sense to me:
recursiveDelegatecallFail
has always expected 228 successes, not 238.- If I change the "failure" loop to start at 229, the calls succeed and the test fails. But if I change the success loop to end at 238, the success loop fails.
So there appears to be a gulf between success/failure. This is not good but I'm not sure what's going on.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
also nit that the comment on top of the test is wrong
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(fixed)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The 30 increment in the loop makes it hard to tell what the exact threshold is
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@magik6k @Stebalien thanks 100% agree - i reorganized the test #10195
No description provided.