Test failures on armhf and armel

[roehling]

Bug report

Required Info:

• Operating System:
  • Debian
• Installation type:
  • Source
• Version or commit hash:
  • 3.3.0
• DDS implementation:
  • N/A
• Client library (if applicable):
  • N/A

Steps to reproduce issue

Build and run tests on armhf or armel box

Additional information

Output of failed tests is as follows:

2: ./rosidl_typesupport_introspection_tests/test/test_arrays_service_introspection.cpp:1038: Failure
2: Expected equality of these values:
2:   item_reference
2:     Which is: 48-byte object <01-00 00-02 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
2:   message.basic_types_values[i]
2:     Which is: 48-byte object <01-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
2: ./rosidl_typesupport_introspection_tests/test/test_arrays_service_introspection.cpp:1106: Failure
2: Expected equality of these values:
2:   message
2:     Which is: 664-byte object <80-F0 FA-02 AB-00 62-00 01-32 64-00 00-00 90-3F 00-00 00-00 00-00 F2-3F CE-C8 18-FC D0-07 00-00 D0-8A FF-FF 60-EA 00-00 00-A6 9D-FD FF-FF FF-FF 80-F0 7B-02 00-00 00-00 01-32 64-00 00-00 90-3F ... 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 88-CC 44-02 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 78-CC 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 68-CC 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
2:   message_copy
2:     Which is: 664-byte object <80-F0 FA-02 AB-00 62-00 01-00 00-00 00-00 90-3F 00-00 00-00 00-00 F2-3F CE-C8 18-FC D0-07 00-00 D0-8A FF-FF 60-EA 00-00 00-A6 9D-FD FF-FF FF-FF 80-F0 7B-02 00-00 00-00 01-32 64-00 00-00 90-3F ... 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 68-EA 44-02 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 78-EA 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 88-EA 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
2: [  FAILED  ] ArraysServiceIntrospectionTest/0.CanWriteTypeErasedResponseMessage, where TypeParam = rosidl_typesupport_introspection_tests__srv__Arrays (1 ms)

./rosidl_typesupport_introspection_tests/test/test_arrays_service_introspection.cpp:998: Failure
Expected equality of these values:
  item_reference
    Which is: -nan
  message.float64_values[i]
    Which is: -nan
./rosidl_typesupport_introspection_tests/test/test_arrays_service_introspection.cpp:1038: Failure
Expected equality of these values:
  item_reference
    Which is: 48-byte object <01-00 00-02 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
  message.basic_types_values[i]
    Which is: 48-byte object <01-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
./rosidl_typesupport_introspection_tests/test/test_arrays_service_introspection.cpp:1106: Failure
Expected equality of these values:
  message
    Which is: 664-byte object <80-F0 FA-02 AB-00 62-00 01-32 64-00 00-00 90-3F 00-00 00-00 00-00 F2-3F CE-C8 18-FC D0-07 00-00 D0-8A FF-FF 60-EA 00-00 00-A6 9D-FD FF-FF FF-FF 80-F0 7B-02 00-00 00-00 01-32 64-00 00-00 90-3F ... 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 88-CC 44-02 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 78-CC 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 68-CC 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
  message_copy
    Which is: 664-byte object <80-F0 FA-02 AB-00 62-00 01-00 00-00 00-00 90-3F 00-00 00-00 00-00 F2-3F CE-C8 18-FC D0-07 00-00 D0-8A FF-FF 60-EA 00-00 00-A6 9D-FD FF-FF FF-FF 80-F0 7B-02 00-00 00-00 01-32 64-00 00-00 90-3F ... 00-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 00-00 00-00 FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF FF-FF 68-EA 44-02 00-00 00-00 01-00 00-00 78-EA 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 88-EA 44-02 09-00 00-00 0A-00 00-00 00-00 00-00>
[  FAILED  ] ArraysServiceIntrospectionTest/0.CanWriteTypeErasedResponseMessage, where TypeParam = rosidl_typesupport_introspection_tests__srv__Arrays (1 ms)

[clalancette]

Yeah, this is unfortunately not surprising. We don't test on any 32-bit platforms, so there are probably bugs in there.

We're happy to review any patches to fix support on 32-bit, but we are unlikely to spend time on it ourselves. I'll mark this as help-wanted for now.