Drop flaky test_healthcheck_response_time

[russellb]

This test is flaky in CI.

https://buildkite.com/organizations/vllm/analytics/suites/ci-1/tests/c4322c0f-95c8-8ab8-a80f-01a25f114d5e?period=28days

This test is very timing sensitive and may fail depending on what
system it is run on, or what else is going on in the system under
test. If we ever try to run more tests in parallel, it will make this
worse.

One example failure has a message like this:

[2025-08-04T10:45:00Z] > assert load_response_time < 0.1
[2025-08-04T10:45:00Z] E assert 0.10481084599996393 < 0.1

The error here is that the response time took just over 0.1 seconds.

We could adjust the timing parameters, but I don't think adjusting to
where it won't be flaky will result in a test we get enough value out
of. I propose just dropping it.

Signed-off-by: Russell Bryant [email protected]

[github-actions]

👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM project.

💬 Join our developer Slack at https://slack.vllm.ai to discuss your PR in #pr-reviews, coordinate on features in #feat- channels, or join special interest groups in #sig- channels.

Just a reminder: PRs would not trigger full CI run by default. Instead, it would only run fastcheck CI which starts running only a small and essential subset of CI tests to quickly catch errors. You can run other CI tests on top of those by going to your fastcheck build on Buildkite UI (linked in the PR checks section) and unblock them. If you do not have permission to unblock, ping simon-mo or khluu to add you in our Buildkite org.

Once the PR is approved and ready to go, your PR reviewer(s) can run CI to test the changes comprehensively before merging.

To run CI, PR reviewers can either: Add ready label to the PR or enable auto-merge.

🚀

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request removes a flaky test test_healthcheck_response_time. While I understand the motivation to remove flaky tests from CI, I believe this particular test serves a valuable purpose in guarding against a potential denial-of-service vulnerability. Instead of removing it, I recommend fixing the flakiness. My review provides a detailed comment on why the test is important and how it could be improved.

[simon-mo]

Agreed. There can be a better way to test this.

In addition, the behavior it is testing shouldn’t be an issue anymore as we don’t run blocking ops in api server.

[DarkLight1337]

cc @njhill