tests: fix flaky listchannels doc example by waiting for l3 to disable its l4 channel
What the developer wrote
Authored by Ken Sedgwick
tests: fix flaky listchannels doc example by waiting for l3 to disable its l4 channel
The Update examples in doc schemas CI job intermittently fails with the
l3->l4 direction of their channel flipping between disabled and enabled
in the regenerated listchannels example (channel_flags 3 vs 1, active
false vs true).
l4's database is deleted to generate the recoverchannel example, after
which l3 disables its side of the l3-l4 channel. That disabling
channel_update is emitted lazily (via an error reply or the gossip
refresh timer), so whether it lands in l3's gossip store before the
listchannels snapshot is a race; the committed example captured the
post-disable state. Wait for the disable explicitly, as the script
already does for the post-close listchannels races.
Fixes: #9327
Changelog-None
What changed, and why it matters
This commit fixes a flaky automated test that generates documentation examples. It adds a wait so that a channel disabled by one node is consistently reflected before taking a snapshot. There is no security vulnerability or user-facing bug being fixed.
No security action needed. Treat as a normal test/documentation reliability fix.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The change is in tests/autogenerate-rpc-examples.py. It passes an additional channel identifier (c34_2) into generate_list_examples and adds a wait_for() call that blocks until l3 reports its side of the l3-l4 channel as inactive. This removes a race where the regenerated listchannels documentation example could show the channel as either active or disabled depending on gossip timing. The underlying behavior (l3 disabling the channel after l4’s database is deleted) is unchanged; only the test harness is made deterministic.
Changed components
tests/autogenerate-rpc-examples.pyInspect captured patch +6 / −2
diff --git a/tests/autogenerate-rpc-examples.py b/tests/autogenerate-rpc-examples.py
index 4d8e171d..407f7fe3 100644
--- a/tests/autogenerate-rpc-examples.py
+++ b/tests/autogenerate-rpc-examples.py
@@ -1548,7 +1548,7 @@ def generate_backup_recovery_examples(node_factory, l4, l5, l6, regenerate_block
raise
-def generate_list_examples(bitcoind, l1, l2, l3, c12, c23_2, inv_l31, inv_l32, offer_l23, inv_req_l1_l22, address_l22):
+def generate_list_examples(bitcoind, l1, l2, l3, c12, c23_2, c34_2, inv_l31, inv_l32, offer_l23, inv_req_l1_l22, address_l22):
"""Generates lists rpc examples"""
try:
logger.info('Lists Start...')
@@ -1612,6 +1612,10 @@ def generate_list_examples(bitcoind, l1, l2, l3, c12, c23_2, inv_l31, inv_l32, o
update_example(node=l2, method='listpeerchannels', params={}, response=listpeerchannels_res2)
update_example(node=l1, method='listchannels', params={'short_channel_id': c12})
+ # l4's database was deleted for the recoverchannel example, so l3 will
+ # disable its side of their channel; that channel_update is emitted
+ # lazily, so wait for it or the listchannels snapshot below races it.
+ wait_for(lambda: [c['active'] for c in l3.rpc.listchannels(c34_2)['channels'] if c['source'] == l3.info['id']] == [False])
update_example(node=l3, method='listchannels', params={})
listnodes_res1 = l2.rpc.listnodes(l3.info['id'])
@@ -1759,7 +1763,7 @@ def test_generate_examples(node_factory, bitcoind, executor):
generate_channels_examples(node_factory, bitcoind, l1, l3, l4, l5, regenerate_blockchain)
generate_autoclean_delete_examples(l1, l2, l3, l4, l5, c12, c23)
generate_backup_recovery_examples(node_factory, l4, l5, l6, regenerate_blockchain)
- generate_list_examples(bitcoind, l1, l2, l3, c12, c23_2, inv_l31, inv_l32, offer_l23, inv_req_l1_l22, address_l22)
+ generate_list_examples(bitcoind, l1, l2, l3, c12, c23_2, c34_2, inv_l31, inv_l32, offer_l23, inv_req_l1_l22, address_l22)
update_examples_in_schema_files()
logger.info('All Done!!!')
except Exception as e:
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.