-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 465
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
Failing test on v16 and x86 platform #1290
Comments
I did some digging into this issue. So far, it appears that a normal CI run will reliably reproduce this error. Occasionally, they will succeed but that seems to be more of an exception than the norm. However, when I tried to run just this particular test using Does anyone have any other ideas that I could explore? Issues to persist when we are running on X86 only, but against all node versions: https://github.com/JckXia/node-addon-api/actions/runs/4440781888/jobs/7795016181 |
Hi @JckXia , Thanks for looking into this! Looking at I remember awhile back we had a similar flakey test. It was due to the missing predicate condition for I noticed we have some places in node-addon-api/test/async_progress_worker.cc Lines 38 to 42 in 0b53d88
Maybe this is the cause? If you can start with addressing this one and see if it fixes the hang. If so, we should look into changing the other places that use condition variables with no predicate: node-addon-api/test/threadsafe_function/threadsafe_function.cc Lines 92 to 94 in 0b53d88
node-addon-api/test/typed_threadsafe_function/typed_threadsafe_function.cc Lines 88 to 90 in 0b53d88
|
Hey @KevinEady! Thank you, I added a wait condition and it indeed seems to have resolved the issue. |
I think that I found the test that does not work:
https://github.com/nodejs/node-addon-api/blob/main/test/async_progress_worker.cc#L185
https://github.com/nodejs/node-addon-api/blob/main/test/async_progress_worker.js#L12
Anyone have an idea because this test hangs on Node.js v16 and x86 platform?
Originally posted by @NickNaso in #1278 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: