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.

Sign up for GitHub

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: relax timer check in test-report-uv-handles.js #26434

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 6, 2019
Merged

test: relax timer check in test-report-uv-handles.js #26434

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion test/report/test-report-uv-handles.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ if (process.argv[2] === 'child') {
}
assert(handle.is_referenced);
}, 3),
timer: common.mustCall(function timer_validator(handle) {
timer: common.mustCallAtLeast(function timer_validator(handle) {
assert(!handle.is_referenced);
assert.strictEqual(handle.repeat, 0);
}),
Expand All @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ if (process.argv[2] === 'child') {
assert(handle.is_referenced);
}),
};
console.log(report.libuv);
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah I left this in accidentally. I actually think printing the uv handle section of the report is quite useful for debugging failures in this test, so I'm inclined to leave it in unless there are objections.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't mind keeping this. It might not be necessary though. If you use any of the report validation functions in test/common/report.js, the full report is printed on failure. That said, if you want to leave this, I'm OK with it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In #25852 the test was failing before the call to helper.validateContent().

for (const entry of report.libuv) {
if (validators[entry.type]) validators[entry.type](entry);
}
Expand Down