Skip to content

branch-4.1: [fix](cloud) Ignore libfdb ASAN failures in cloud UT runner #65749#65774

Open
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-65749-branch-4.1
Open

branch-4.1: [fix](cloud) Ignore libfdb ASAN failures in cloud UT runner #65749#65774
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-65749-branch-4.1

Conversation

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cherry-picked from #65749

## Proposed changes

Cloud UTs can fail at process exit with an existing ASAN crash in
`libfdb_c.so`, while the gtest cases themselves have already run. The
runner should not skip affected tests.

This changes `cloud/script/run_all_tests.sh` to:

- still execute each `_test` binary normally
- tee stdout/stderr to a temporary log
- preserve the test process exit code via `PIPESTATUS[0]`
- treat a non-zero result as success only when that test output contains
both ASAN text and `libfdb_c.so`

A tiny blank-line-only change in `cloud/test/stopwatch_test.cpp` is
included to trigger cloud UT checks.

Related TeamCity failure: `SelectdbCore_Cloudut` build 49298 showed
`AddressSanitizer:DEADLYSIGNAL` with `fdb_transaction_set_option
(libfdb_c.so+0xd889c5)`.

## Testing

```bash
bash -n cloud/script/run_all_tests.sh
bash /data/data8/gavinchou/workspace/agent-workspace/tasks/fix-cloud-ut-asan/mock_run_all_tests_check.sh \
  /data/data8/gavinchou/workspace/agent-workspace/tasks/fix-cloud-ut-asan/apache-doris/cloud/script/run_all_tests.sh
sh format_code.sh cloud/test/stopwatch_test.cpp
```

Co-authored-by: gavinchou <[email protected]>
@github-actions
github-actions Bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner July 17, 2026 11:13
@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

run buildall

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants