test: fix flaky http(s)-set-timeout-server tests

[Trott]

The tests include a callback that might not be invoked but is wrapped in
common.mustCall(). Remove the common.mustCall() wrapper and add a
comment explaining that it should not be added.

Fixes: #11768

Checklist

• make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
• commit message follows commit guidelines

Affected core subsystem(s)

test http https

[Trott]

/cc @nodejs/testing

[refack]

Aren't we excluding an important step in the test?
IMHO a possible alternative solution will be to call server.close(); cb(); only after both server.setTimeout and the connection handlers have both run. And using common.platformTimeout(100)

[refack]

Let's discuss

[Trott]

@refack You have a point. Less elegant but more correct fix coming in a bit...

[Trott]

IMHO a possible alternative solution will be to call server.close(); cb(); only after both server.setTimeout and the connection handlers have both run.

This solution still fails under load. The connection handler still might never get called, and now without calling server.close(), the test times out.

[Trott]

Moving the socket.destroy() as well to a place where it can wait for both callbacks to fire works, though. Trying to understand if that means we're not testing the "right" thing anymore.

Ultimately, may just add a test case: one that solution and one the solution that's here. Then we're getting at everything one way or another (hopefully).

[Trott]

OK, new test case added. PTAL @refack.

@cjihrig may want to re-review as well.

[Trott]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/9275/

[Trott]

Stress test showing failures on master (expected to fail):
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-stress-single-test/1332/

Stress test on this PR (expected to pass):
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-stress-single-test/1333/

[refack]

suggestion: If it "might" not be invoked maybe remove?

[Trott]

If it is invoked, we want to make sure timeout event does not fire on req and res (I guess?).

[refack]

But that's what the new test case does.
Superficially this is not wrong or harmful, but might be distracting for future maintainers.
IMHO either remove, or add to the comment that the next test case makes sure this is always true.

[refack]

Fast timeout makes sense.

[cjihrig]

LGTM

[Trott]

This PR fails in stress test, but much less frequently and in a different way.

[Trott]

Made some adjustments (PTAL, I did not squash the commits for hopefully easier review).

Stress test on this PR: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-stress-single-test/1338/

[refack]

Made some adjustments (PTAL, I did not squash the commits for hopefully easier review).

1. Stress still fails 😞
2. Still, could you explain the reasoning for moving the timeout handler registration?
3. I think you can relax the second test, and just assert the connection handler. That way first case tests the timeout handler, and the second that req, and res don't fire timeouts.

[refack]

P.S.

constserver=http.createServer().on('connection',(req,res)=>{req.on('timeout',common.mustNotCall());res.on('timeout',common.mustNotCall());})

Can a timeout event happen in the "dead space" between the time req and res are created and connection is fired?
/cc @Fishrock123@trevnorris (Trev, cause you dug into the timer/socket quagmire)

[trevnorris]

@refack first need to correct your code. it should be:

constprint=process._rawDebug;constserver=require('http').createServer();server.on('request',(req,res)=>{// this will never fire b/c the request is complete before this callback fires.req.on('timeout',()=>print('req timeout'));// will fire a default 2 mins in the future if the connection isn't closed.res.on('timeout',()=>print('res timeout'));});sever.listen(8080);

The 'connection' event fires the moment the socket is created, while 'request' doesn't fire until the headers have been parsed. IOW, in this case req and res are never created until after the net.Socket is created so there never is a "dead space".

This is different from http.request(). Take the following:

constprint=process._rawDebug;constreq=require('http').request({hostname: 'www.reddit.com'},res=>{print('req callback fired');});constt=process.hrtime();req.setTimeout(10,()=>{constu=process.hrtime(t);print('timeout:',(u[0]*1e3+u[1]/1e6)>>>0,'ms');});req.end();

My machine prints timeout: 22 ms. Meaning the timeout wasn't created until 12 ms in the future. i.e. how long it took to create the connection with the server. This is verified by the documentation

Once a socket is assigned to this request and is connected socket.setTimeout() will be called.

[Trott]

@trevnorris wrote:

// will fire a default 2 mins in the future if the connection isn't closed.res.on('timeout',()=>print('res timeout'));

Ah, of course, but if we're calling server.setTimeout(50, ...) as this test does, then it's 50ms and not 2 minutes.

Just confirmed running the test locally under heavy load that reducing the timeout to 1ms makes the test far more reliable and increasing it to 5000 makes it reliable under the amount of load I was using.

I think the thing to do is remove the test for that timeout to not fire, as clearly it can.

Probably won't solve the ECONNRESET issue that's also showing up, but I think that's a different problem altogether.

[Trott]

Comments added per nits from @refack.

Rebased against master, so running CI again for good measure.

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/9332/ EDIT: Windows failure unrelated.

[refack]

👍

[Trott]

Jenkins was restarted so previous CI either didn't run or we lost the results.

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/9337/

[Trott]

Landed in c5bed4c