process: do not directly schedule _tickCallback in _fatalException #17841
Conversation
This file contains 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
nodejs-github-bot
added
the
lib / src
apapirovski
force-pushed
the
patch-fatal-exception-next-tick
branch
from
f8572f3
to
987ef4f
Compare
addaleax
approved these changes
Dec 24, 2017
jasnell
approved these changes
Dec 27, 2017
addaleax
added
the
author ready
When a process encounters a _fatalException that is caught, it should schedule execution of nextTicks but not in an arbitrary place of the next Immediates queue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensure processImmediate runs, which will then ensure that nextTicks are processed at the end.
apapirovski
force-pushed
the
patch-fatal-exception-next-tick
branch
from
987ef4f
to
5491092
Compare
apapirovski
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 28, 2017
When a process encounters a _fatalException that is caught, it should schedule execution of nextTicks but not in an arbitrary place of the next Immediates queue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensure processImmediate runs, which will then ensure that nextTicks are processed at the end. PR-URL: #17841 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
|
Landed in 41f8c8d |
addaleax
removed
the
author ready
|
This does not land cleanly in v9.x, could you please manually backport |
apapirovski
added a commit
to apapirovski/node
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 31, 2018
When a process encounters a _fatalException that is caught, it should schedule execution of nextTicks but not in an arbitrary place of the next Immediates queue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensure processImmediate runs, which will then ensure that nextTicks are processed at the end. PR-URL: nodejs#17841 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
apapirovski
added a commit
to apapirovski/node
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2018
When a process encounters a _fatalException that is caught, it should schedule execution of nextTicks but not in an arbitrary place of the next Immediates queue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensure processImmediate runs, which will then ensure that nextTicks are processed at the end. PR-URL: nodejs#17841 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
addaleax
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2018
When a process encounters a _fatalException that is caught, it should schedule execution of nextTicks but not in an arbitrary place of the next Immediates queue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensure processImmediate runs, which will then ensure that nextTicks are processed at the end. Backport-PR-URL: #19006 PR-URL: #17841 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
addaleax
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2018
When a process encounters a _fatalException that is caught, it should schedule execution of nextTicks but not in an arbitrary place of the next Immediates queue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensure processImmediate runs, which will then ensure that nextTicks are processed at the end. Backport-PR-URL: #19006 PR-URL: #17841 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2018
When a process encounters a _fatalException that is caught, it should schedule execution of nextTicks but not in an arbitrary place of the next Immediates queue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensure processImmediate runs, which will then ensure that nextTicks are processed at the end. Backport-PR-URL: #19006 PR-URL: #17841 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Closed
|
Should this be backported to |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
When a process encounters a
_fatalExceptionthat is caught, it should schedule execution ofnextTicksbut not in an arbitrary place of the nextImmediatesqueue. Instead, add a no-op function to the queue that will ensureprocessImmediateruns, which will then ensure thatnextTicksare processed at the end.The current behaviour is counter-intuitive and can have completely unforeseen consequences because it allows for a
_tickCallbackto be scheduled anywhere within thesetImmediatequeue, which breaks the one basic rule ofnextTick— that it runs when all the current operations complete.CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/12279/
CitGM: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/1165/
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
process, test