Skip to content

Conversation

@santigimeno
Copy link
Member

@santigimenosantigimeno commented Oct 6, 2016

Checklist
  • make -j8 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test nosign (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)
Description of change

It's not guaranteed that the first socket that tries to connect is the
first that succeeds so the rest of assumptions made in the test are not
correct.
Fix it by making sure the second socket does not try to connect until
the first has succeeded.
The IPC channel can already be closed when sending the second socket. It
should be allowed.
Also, don't start sending messages until the worker is online.

Fixes: #8950

@nodejs-github-botnodejs-github-bot added the test Issues and PRs related to the tests. label Oct 6, 2016
@mscdexmscdex added the child_process Issues and PRs related to the child_process subsystem. label Oct 6, 2016
@santigimeno
Copy link
MemberAuthor

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

Copy link
Member

@jasnelljasnell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

It's not guaranteed that the first socket that tries to connect is the first that succeeds so the rest of assumptions made in the test are not correct. Fix it by making sure the second socket does not try to connect until the first has succeeded. The IPC channel can already be closed when sending the second socket. It should be allowed. Also, don't start sending messages until the worker is online. Fixes: nodejs#8950 PR-URL: nodejs#8954 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Brian White <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
@santigimeno
Copy link
MemberAuthor

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/4431/ mostly green except for some unrelated failures. Landing now.

@santigimenosantigimeno merged commit 33e598a into nodejs:masterOct 8, 2016
@santigimeno
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Landed as 33e598a. Thanks

jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2016
It's not guaranteed that the first socket that tries to connect is the first that succeeds so the rest of assumptions made in the test are not correct. Fix it by making sure the second socket does not try to connect until the first has succeeded. The IPC channel can already be closed when sending the second socket. It should be allowed. Also, don't start sending messages until the worker is online. Fixes: #8950 PR-URL: #8954 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Brian White <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Fishrock123 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2016
It's not guaranteed that the first socket that tries to connect is the first that succeeds so the rest of assumptions made in the test are not correct. Fix it by making sure the second socket does not try to connect until the first has succeeded. The IPC channel can already be closed when sending the second socket. It should be allowed. Also, don't start sending messages until the worker is online. Fixes: #8950 PR-URL: #8954 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Brian White <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2016
It's not guaranteed that the first socket that tries to connect is the first that succeeds so the rest of assumptions made in the test are not correct. Fix it by making sure the second socket does not try to connect until the first has succeeded. The IPC channel can already be closed when sending the second socket. It should be allowed. Also, don't start sending messages until the worker is online. Fixes: #8950 PR-URL: #8954 Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Brian White <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
@MylesBorinsMylesBorins mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2016
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

child_processIssues and PRs related to the child_process subsystem.testIssues and PRs related to the tests.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Investigate flaky parallel/test-child-process-fork-regr-gh-2847

7 participants

@santigimeno@mscdex@mhdawson@jasnell@cjihrig@MylesBorins@nodejs-github-bot