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

tools: improve node:test output when running in github actions #49129

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

MoLow
Copy link
Member

@MoLow MoLow commented Aug 13, 2023

Refs: #49120

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Review requested:

  • @nodejs/actions
  • @nodejs/security-wg

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory. labels Aug 13, 2023
@atlowChemi
Copy link
Member

@MoLow This seems to have not worked?
https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/5846748905/job/15852264716#step:6:5487

/opt/hostedtoolcache/Python/3.11.4/x64/bin/python3 tools/test.py  -p tap --logfile test.tap \
	--mode=release --flaky-tests=keep_retrying \
	-p actions --node-args='--test-reporter=spec' --node-args='--test-reporter-destination=stdout' -t 300 --measure-flakiness 9 default pummel addons js-native-api node-api benchmark 
Running 4010 tests
..................................................

@MoLow
Copy link
Member Author

MoLow commented Aug 13, 2023

This seems to have not worked?

@atlowChemi this will only change the behavior in case of failed tests

@@ -94,4 +94,4 @@ jobs:
- name: Test
run: |
cd $TAR_DIR
make run-ci -j2 V=1 TEST_CI_ARGS="-p dots --measure-flakiness 9"
make run-ci -j2 V=1 TEST_CI_ARGS="-p dots --node-args='--test-reporter=spec' --measure-flakiness 9"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This should be an improvement in terms of the amount of output we see from failed tests, which should help with debugging.

There is also the issue of the asan CI job truncating output. Since node:test is never used as the main test runner, a possible next step to address that issue could be to create a custom reporter in tools/ that only outputs the test failures and diagnostic messages. It could basically be a slimmed down version of the spec reporter.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I guess we can do that in a follow-up. perhaps only in the asan job

@@ -94,4 +94,4 @@ jobs:
- name: Test
run: |
cd $TAR_DIR
make run-ci -j2 V=1 TEST_CI_ARGS="-p dots --measure-flakiness 9"
make run-ci -j2 V=1 TEST_CI_ARGS="-p dots --node-args='--test-reporter=spec' --measure-flakiness 9"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It looks like the CI ran fine so I guess there is no issue, but are we sure this won't impact any of the tests that expect different reporters?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

no issue. tests that look at reporters (e.g snapshot tests, exit code tests etc) always spawn a child and control the env vars and flags

Copy link
Member

@GeoffreyBooth GeoffreyBooth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Don’t we usually add dependencies in a dedicated PR? Though this seems isolated enough that I wouldn’t object in this case.

It would be nice to see an example of the output of a failed test/job using this PR.

Comment on lines +319 to +323
def AboutToRun(self, case):
if not hasattr(case, 'additional_flags'):
case.additional_flags = []
case.additional_flags.append('--test-reporter=./tools/github_reporter/index.js')
case.additional_flags.append('--test-reporter-destination=stdout')
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If I understand this correctly, this is adding two additional flags to all the tests that run. This feels worrisome, because as a test author I’d expect the flags I define at the top of the test file to be the only flags that are used; I can imagine issues with process.argv and so on. Could these be defined via environment variables instead?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is only the case in github actions, within jenkins or locally the flags wont be added.
the only way to add this via an environment variable is with NODE_OPTIONS

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

aduh95 commented Aug 14, 2023

Adding the node_modules folder is a bit much don't you think? Is there a way to keep only the useful part by e.g. bundling it?

@MoLow
Copy link
Member Author

MoLow commented Aug 14, 2023

Adding the node_modules folder is a bit much don't you think? Is there a way to keep only the useful part by e.g. bundling it?

done

Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95 aduh95 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

RSLGTM for tools/github_reporter/index.js, LGTM for the rest :)

@MoLow MoLow added request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. commit-queue-rebase Add this label to allow the Commit Queue to land a PR in several commits. labels Aug 14, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Aug 14, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@MoLow MoLow added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. labels Aug 14, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Aug 15, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Landed in 802c52f...9cc7327

nodejs-github-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
nodejs-github-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
nodejs-github-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
@MoLow MoLow deleted the improve-output branch August 15, 2023 07:45
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
@UlisesGascon UlisesGascon mentioned this pull request Aug 15, 2023
RafaelGSS pushed a commit to RafaelGSS/node that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#49129
Refs: nodejs#49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit to RafaelGSS/node that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
RafaelGSS pushed a commit to RafaelGSS/node that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#49129
Refs: nodejs#49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
rluvaton pushed a commit to rluvaton/node that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#49129
Refs: nodejs#49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
rluvaton pushed a commit to rluvaton/node that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
rluvaton pushed a commit to rluvaton/node that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#49129
Refs: nodejs#49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 16, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 16, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 16, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2023
PR-URL: #49129
Refs: #49120
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. commit-queue-rebase Add this label to allow the Commit Queue to land a PR in several commits. meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants