Re: Issue with markers in isolation tester? Or not?

Hello, Michael!

> Could you summarize here what you have done to achieve test
> stabilization in your new patch set posted at [1] without using the
> proposal of this thread?

Mostly idea is next:

Let's imagine we have two steps - step_before and step_after which may end
in either order.
Then instead of such step/markers structure:

step_before(step_after)
stepN
stepN+1
step_after

use the next:

step_before
stepN
stepN+1
step_after(step_before)

In the first case, there are two possible results:
1) step_before is finished before step_after - reported as step_before,
step_after
2) step_after is launched before step_before ends - reported as step_after,
step_before

But in the case second variant:
1) step_before is finished before step_after - reported as step_before,
step_after
2) step_after is launched before step_before ends - reported as
step_before, step_after

So, the second option provides the same result regardless of order of
finishing of step_before and step_after, which is the thing I want to
achieve here.

Best regards,
Mikhail.