Skip to content
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

test: don't spawn child processes in domain test #974

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 5, 2015

Conversation

bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

Make parallel/test-domain-abort-on-uncaught a little easier to debug,
make it execute the tests in the same process instead of each test in
a separate child process.

R=@chrisdickinson

https://jenkins-iojs.nodesource.com/view/iojs/job/iojs+any-pr+multi/202/

firstRun,
netServer
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's very peculiar but if firstRun is not last, errors == 4 instead of 5...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That seems ... bizarre.

@chrisdickinson
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM. The ordering issue might bear more looking into.

Turn counter macros into no-op instructions when counters are disabled.
Evaluating to nothing makes gcc complain when the macro is used in a
conditional.  Fixes the following warning:

    ../src/tls_wrap.cc:320:5: warning:
    suggest braces around empty body in an 'if' statement [-Wempty-body]
         NODE_COUNT_NET_BYTES_SENT(write_size_);
         ^

PR-URL: nodejs#974
Reviewed-By: Chris Dickinson <[email protected]>
Make parallel/test-domain-abort-on-uncaught a little easier to debug,
make it execute the tests in the same process instead of each test in
a separate child process.

PR-URL: nodejs#974
Reviewed-By: Chris Dickinson <[email protected]>
@bnoordhuis bnoordhuis merged commit 7b554b1 into nodejs:v1.x Mar 5, 2015
@bnoordhuis bnoordhuis deleted the simplify-domains-test branch March 5, 2015 19:12
@rvagg rvagg mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants