test: delete `test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js` by RaisinTen · Pull Request #42720 · nodejs/node · GitHub

It was disconnecting the runners from the CI server. Not worth having a
resource-intensive test for this kind of an edge cases.

Fixes: #42719
Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen raisinten@gmail.com

If it's a memory issue (and it doesn't only affect FreeBSD), we should probably use common.enoughTestMem

If it's a memory issue (and it doesn't only affect FreeBSD), we should probably use common.enoughTestMem

@targos that doesn't seem to work - https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-freebsd/43653/nodes=freebsd12-x64/console. :/

Or maybe just delete the test?
I'm not sure it's worth having a resource-intensive test for this kind of edge cases 🤔

It was disconnecting the runners from the CI server. Not worth having a resource-intensive test for this kind of an edge cases. Fixes: nodejs#42719 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/43496/

Agreed, @targos deleted, PTAL

I don't know if it's possible, but if we were able to reduce the maximum buffer size limit with a command-line flag, that could be another way to fix it.

I don't know if it's possible, but if we were able to reduce the maximum buffer size limit with a command-line flag, that could be another way to fix it.

That won't be possible because Node.js uses

node/src/node_buffer.h

Line 32 in 93c4dc5

static const size_t kMaxLength = v8::TypedArray::kMaxLength;

for the max buffer length and it's a compile time constant from V8

node/deps/v8/include/v8-typed-array.h

Lines 25 to 28 in 93c4dc5

    
           static constexpr size_t kMaxLength = 
        
               internal::kApiSystemPointerSize == 4 
        
                   ? internal::kSmiMaxValue 
        
                   : static_cast<size_t>(uint64_t{1} << 32);

.

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/43500/

Fast-track has been requested by @richardlau. Please 👍 to approve.

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/43501/

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/43502/

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/43503/

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/43504/

The flake that keeps appearing is #42741. I've resumed CI again, but considering the contents of this PR is removing a different test - I propose landing this as-is.

I'm hoping to include this PR in v18.0.0 to mitigate some of CI instability.

Hit the flake again, but FreeBSD is also experimental. Landing this now.

It was disconnecting the runners from the CI server. Not worth having a resource-intensive test for this kind of an edge cases. Fixes: #42719 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> PR-URL: #42720 Fixes: #42719 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

Landed in 19064be

It was disconnecting the runners from the CI server. Not worth having a resource-intensive test for this kind of an edge cases. Fixes: nodejs#42719 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> PR-URL: nodejs#42720 Fixes: nodejs#42719 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

It was disconnecting the runners from the CI server. Not worth having a resource-intensive test for this kind of an edge cases. Fixes: #42719 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> PR-URL: #42720 Fixes: #42719 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

It was disconnecting the runners from the CI server. Not worth having a resource-intensive test for this kind of an edge cases. Fixes: #42719 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> PR-URL: #42720 Backport-PR-URL: #42967 Fixes: #42719 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

nodejs-github-bot added needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. test Issues and PRs related to the tests. labels Apr 13, 2022

RaisinTen force-pushed the test/mark-test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js-as-flaky-on-freebsd branch from c06b845 to e0091c7 Compare April 13, 2022 14:19

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

jasnell approved these changes Apr 13, 2022

View reviewed changes

RaisinTen added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no outstanding review comments, and a CI started. label Apr 13, 2022

targos suggested changes Apr 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

RaisinTen removed the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no outstanding review comments, and a CI started. label Apr 14, 2022

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

test: delete test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js

d56a3bc

It was disconnecting the runners from the CI server. Not worth having a resource-intensive test for this kind of an edge cases. Fixes: nodejs#42719 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>

RaisinTen force-pushed the test/mark-test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js-as-flaky-on-freebsd branch from fc18ad6 to d56a3bc Compare April 14, 2022 13:35

RaisinTen changed the title test: mark test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash flaky on freebsd test: delete test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js Apr 14, 2022

targos approved these changes Apr 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

RaisinTen added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no outstanding review comments, and a CI started. label Apr 14, 2022

richardlau approved these changes Apr 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

richardlau added the fast-track PRs that do not need to wait for 48 hours to land. label Apr 14, 2022

BethGriggs approved these changes Apr 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

sxa approved these changes Apr 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

BethGriggs mentioned this pull request Apr 14, 2022

2022-04-19, Version 18.0.0 (Current) #42262

Merged

lpinca approved these changes Apr 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

BethGriggs closed this Apr 14, 2022

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Apr 15, 2022

CI Reliability 2022-04-15 nodejs/reliability#252

Open

16 tasks

RaisinTen deleted the test/mark-test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js-as-flaky-on-freebsd branch April 15, 2022 01:06

richardlau mentioned this pull request May 4, 2022

[v16.x backport] src,inspector: fix empty MaybeLocal crash #42967

Closed

juanarbol mentioned this pull request May 31, 2022

2022-05-XX, Version 16.16.0 'Gallium' (LTS) #43268

Closed

juanarbol mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2022

v16.15.1 proposal #43272

Merged

This was referenced Jan 28, 2025

chore(deps): update node.js to v16.15.1 - autoclosed opalmedapps/docs#22

Closed

chore: update software packages (patch) opalmedapps/docs#27

Closed

test: delete `test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js` by RaisinTen · Pull Request #42720 · nodejs/node · GitHub

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

test: delete test/pummel/test-repl-empty-maybelocal-crash.js - #42720

Conversation

RaisinTen commented Apr 13, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

This comment was marked as outdated.

targos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

RaisinTen commented Apr 14, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

targos commented Apr 14, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

RaisinTen commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

targos commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

RaisinTen commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

BethGriggs commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

BethGriggs commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

BethGriggs commented Apr 14, 2022

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

8 participants

RaisinTen commented Apr 13, 2022 •
edited
Loading

RaisinTen commented Apr 14, 2022 •
edited
Loading

targos commented Apr 14, 2022 •
edited
Loading