mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-06 21:05:21 +02:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
b2c565038b
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Shared worktree services use lock leases and worker-thread heartbeats > - The lock test suite measured wall-clock timing across two threads > - Processor contention allowed a heartbeat tick to change the value during an assertion > - This pull request removes that timing race and restores a regression guard > - The benefit is a stable test suite that still detects slow heartbeats ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** The worktree port registry lock suite failed at random under continuous-integration processor contention. The failure reported a fresh timestamp where the test expected an old timestamp. **Expected behavior** The suite must pass when the heartbeat runs at its supported interval. It must also fail when the heartbeat interval regresses. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run `npx vitest run src/worktree-port-registry.test.ts` in `packages/shared`. 2. Repeat the run under bounded processor contention. 3. Set the heartbeat interval to 3000 ms and run the asynchronous critical-section test. **Paperclip version or commit** `a661caf74e704f7700a8b8a1e79b76ebd04e3483` **Deployment mode** Built from source. **Installation method** Built from source. **Agent adapter(s) involved** Not adapter-specific (core test). **Database mode** Not database-related. **Additional context** Related open pull requests are #11994, #11985, and #11922. This pull request keeps all five tests active and does not use `skip`, `skipIf`, or `todo`. ## What Changed - Build the fallback-probe lock state by hand so no live heartbeat changes the timestamp during the assertion. - Count distinct heartbeat refreshes in the asynchronous critical-section test. - Close the fake probe and settle the pending lock attempt in a `finally` block. - Keep production code unchanged. ## Verification - `npx vitest run src/worktree-port-registry.test.ts` — 5 of 5 tests pass. - `npx vitest run` — 72 files and 704 tests pass at submit time. - `npx tsc --noEmit` — exit code 0. - Ten target-file runs pass under bounded processor contention. - A 3000 ms heartbeat interval fails with `expected 2 to be greater than or equal to 3`. - An inverted cleanup assertion exits normally in 379 ms without a leaked worker. ## Risks Low risk. This pull request changes one test file. It changes test setup and assertions only. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-5 through Codex. Exact model ID: GPT-5. The model used tool calls and code execution. The context window is not disclosed by the runtime. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>