-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
fix(core): harden Config.initialize() join path #11075
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
+53
−9
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[Suggestion] R1-1: The new
'rejects a joining caller whose signal is already aborted'test pins that the joining caller rejects with the abort reason, but not that it rejects fast —release()runs before any assertion onjoining, so the fail-before-joining ordering is never checked. Ifoptions?.signal?.throwIfAborted()is later moved belowawait this.initializationPromise, the joiner blocks on the full foreign flight before rejecting with the identical abort reason — reintroducing exactly the "aborted-signal joiner hangs on the first flight" behaviour this PR removes — yet this test still passes green, becauserelease()has already let the first flight settle.Witness:
Assert the rejection while the gate is still held — move
await expect(joining).rejects.toBe(abortReason);aboverelease();:release()must stay in the test so the existingawait expect(first).resolves.toBeUndefined();still holds — dropping it instead of reordering the assertion would hang the test. If you apply this reorder, please prove it kills the mutant: move (or delete) thethrowIfAborted()guard below the await and confirm this test then goes red — with the gate still held, the pre-release()rejection assertion never settles and the test times out.中文说明
新增的
'rejects a joining caller whose signal is already aborted'测试只钉住了「加入方会以中止原因 reject」,没有钉住「它 reject 得快」——release()先于对joining的任何断言执行,因此「先失败、后加入」的顺序属性从未被检查。如果日后有人把options?.signal?.throwIfAborted()移到await this.initializationPromise之后,加入方会先阻塞在别人的完整初始化上、再以同一个abortReasonreject——恰好重新引入本 PR 要消除的「已中止信号的加入方挂在第一次初始化上」行为——而这条测试仍然通过,因为在断言 rejection 之前release()已让第一次初始化落定。见证(PR HEAD 上的探针矩阵,独立 scratch 树):原守卫位置 + 现有测试 → 通过;变异体(守卫移到 await 之后)+ 现有测试 → 通过(变异体存活);变异体 + 在
release()之前断言 rejection → 失败(60 秒超时);原守卫 + 在release()之前断言 rejection → 通过。修复:在门控仍然持有时断言 rejection——把
await expect(joining).rejects.toBe(abortReason);移到release();之前:前提约束:
release()必须保留,现有的await expect(first).resolves.toBeUndefined();依赖它——只删release()而不是调整断言顺序会让测试挂起。修复见证:应用该重排后,请证明它能杀死变异体——把throwIfAborted()守卫移到 await 之后(或删除),确认该测试变红:门控仍被持有时,release()之前的 rejection 断言永远不会落定,测试超时。— qwen3.8-max via Qwen Code /review (v0.23.0)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Applied in 82d82c7 — the reorder is exactly as suggested:
release()stays, soawait expect(first).resolves.toBeUndefined()still holds.On the requested mutation witness: I did not run the mutant probe, so I am not claiming a reproduced red. The argument the reorder rests on is structural —
options?.signal?.throwIfAborted()sits ahead of everyawaitininitialize()(config.ts:3013, beforeawait this.initializationPromise), so the joining promise settles on the first microtask and the pre-release()assertion resolves without the first flight finishing. Move the guard below thatawaitand the assertion has nothing to settle it while the gate is held, which is the 60s timeout your matrix recorded. CI on this head is the check that the shipped ordering is green.The comment above the assertions now says why the order matters, so the next reader does not "tidy" it back.
中文说明
已在 82d82c7 中按建议重排,
release()保留,原有的await expect(first).resolves.toBeUndefined()仍然成立。关于要求的变异见证:我没有跑变异体探针,因此不声称复现了红。重排所依赖的是结构性理由——
options?.signal?.throwIfAborted()位于initialize()中所有await之前(config.ts:3013,在await this.initializationPromise之前),所以加入方的 promise 在第一个 microtask 就落定,release()之前的断言无需等第一次初始化结束即可完成。把守卫移到该await之后,门控仍被持有时该断言就没有任何东西能让它落定,正是你矩阵里记录的 60 秒超时。当前 head 的 CI 负责验证重排后的测试是绿的。断言上方的注释已写明顺序为什么重要,避免后来者把它「整理」回去。