Double pytest.skip leads to failure

Hello everyone.

I think the following is a bug.

@pytest.fixture
def fixA():
    yield
    pytest.skip(reason="A")

@pytest.fixture
def fixB():
    yield
    pytest.skip(reason="B")

def test_skip(fixA, fixB):  # FAILS
    assert True

Gives the following error report (removed tracebacks).

____________________________ ERROR at teardown of test_skip _____________________________
  + Exception Group Traceback (most recent call last):
  | <traceback>
  | BaseExceptionGroup: errors while tearing down <Function test_skip> (2 sub-exceptions)
  +-+---------------- 1 ----------------
    | <traceback>
    | Skipped: A
    +---------------- 2 ----------------
    | <traceback>
    | Skipped: B
    +------------------------------------

Maybe pytest checks for the error raised being of the type of skips, and thus here it bugs because it's an ExceptionGroup and not a skip type? I'm just very wildly guessing, I don't know the internals of pytest.

@Zac-HD

In pytest 7.2.2 (or when removing fixB), this results in 1 passed, 1 skipped (which is somewhat confusing but another long-standing issue).

With pytest 7.3.0 and later, this errors in the same way you mention. Bisected to 3a68c08:

Use exceptiongroup for multiple errors during teardown #10226

And I think your guess is spot-on, e.g. around here:

pytest/src/_pytest/runner.py

Lines 398 to 410 in b3ee80b

    
           skip_exceptions = [Skipped] 
        
           unittest = sys.modules.get("unittest") 
        
           if unittest is not None: 
        
               skip_exceptions.append(unittest.SkipTest) 
        
           if isinstance(call.excinfo.value, tuple(skip_exceptions)): 
        
               outcome = "skipped" 
        
               r_ = collector._repr_failure_py(call.excinfo, "line") 
        
               assert isinstance(r_, ExceptionChainRepr), repr(r_) 
        
               r = r_.reprcrash 
        
               assert r 
        
               longrepr = (str(r.path), r.lineno, r.message) 
        
           else: 
        
               outcome = "failed"

I suspect this might also happen with other outcome exceptions. Maybe we should immediately raise the first outcome exception as a special case rather than grouping those? Perhaps conditionally as long as there are no other non-outcome exceptions that happened?

cc @Zac-HD @jakkdl who did a lot of work around exception groups

We should consider exception group's with only skip as skip

Ok great!

Maybe we should immediately raise the first outcome exception as a special case rather than grouping those? Perhaps conditionally as long as there are no other non-outcome exceptions that happened?

I was thinking about this and I don't think the desired behaviour is trivial to define. For example, we might want to skip if there are only skips, but we might also want to allow fixtures to skip even if an inner fixture failed? Like a kind of "catching fixture". It seems far fetched, but I think there's potentially something to clarify here.

Also, we might want to skip at the first skip encountered, OR we might want to allow outermost fixture to still fail the test even if an inner fixture skipped it?

So as I see it, it's a discussion that needs to happen.

The groupings was added so exceptions no longer get lost

Now we need to account for that in places

if isinstance(exc := call.excinfo.value, tuple(skip_exceptions)) or (
    isinstance(exc, BaseExceptionGroup) and exc.subgroup(skip_exceptions)
):

once we drop Python 3.10, the new except* syntax should also make it easier.

I did a quick excursion to exitstack

Exitstack nests the errors by manipulation of the context so it behaves as if it was nested

We should consider whether we want that or groups in general

Based on the behavior of exception groups i slightly prefer the idea of eventually handling those from groups

We'll need to handle ExceptionGroups anyway, in case the user calls pytest.skip() from inside an asyncio.TaskGroup context manager (among other cases)

Good point

would love to take a crack at this now that i've made some progress with pytest.exit().
could you assign it to me and in general should i wait to be assigned to something before i start working on it?

open source projects almost never assign issues - it's very rare to see duplicate PRs for an issue more than a few days old, and so it's not worth the overhead in notifications etc. Which means, feel free to just open a PR!

fix pytest-dev#13537: Add support for ExceptionGroup with only Skippe…

chore(deps): update pytest (major)

Merge branch 'renovate/pytest-9.x' into 'main'

🔒️ Update dependency pytest to v9 [SECURITY] (#16)

[SECURITY] Update dependency pytest to v9 [SECURITY] (#2)

Update dependency pytest to v9 (#35)

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

Double `pytest.skip` leads to failure #13537

2 remaining items

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

	skip_exceptions = [Skipped]
	unittest = sys.modules.get("unittest")
	if unittest is not None:
	skip_exceptions.append(unittest.SkipTest)
	if isinstance(call.excinfo.value, tuple(skip_exceptions)):
	outcome = "skipped"
	r_ = collector._repr_failure_py(call.excinfo, "line")
	assert isinstance(r_, ExceptionChainRepr), repr(r_)
	r = r_.reprcrash
	assert r
	longrepr = (str(r.path), r.lineno, r.message)
	else:
	outcome = "failed"

Double pytest.skip leads to failure #13537

Description

Activity

The-Compiler commented on Jun 18, 2025

RonnyPfannschmidt commented on Jun 18, 2025

ego-thales commented on Jun 18, 2025

RonnyPfannschmidt commented on Jun 18, 2025

Zac-HD commented on Jun 18, 2025

RonnyPfannschmidt commented on Jun 20, 2025

Zac-HD commented on Jun 20, 2025

RonnyPfannschmidt commented on Jun 20, 2025

gomri15 commented on Sep 18, 2025

Zac-HD commented on Sep 18, 2025

2 remaining items

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions

Double `pytest.skip` leads to failure #13537