-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
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
src,http: fix uncaughtException miss in http #5571
Conversation
5a6b263
to
99ed466
Compare
It seems the following patch:
would fix the issue while not missing any async-wrap calls. |
@misterdjules genius. have one small alteration on that, but makes sense. |
99ed466
to
efee130
Compare
If the call to MakeCallback is currently in_makecallback() then return the empty handle instead of Undefined. This allows the error to propagate through multiple MakeCallback calls.
efee130
to
cd62963
Compare
@misterdjules That worked perfectly. Thanks for the idea. Reason I only return if |
New CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/1853/ Edit: CI failures are on a single arm machine and appear to all be infra related. |
@thealphanerd should this have landed on master first? There aren't any conflicts so I can move it over if needed. |
I think we should close this and make a new PR against master. we should then likely aim for a release on Monday. I'm not feeling super comfortable pushing through a release without review at 9:30pm on Friday. @rvagg @jasnell @nodejs/ctc please feel free to chime in here. For those of you just joining us v5.7.1 has a nasty regression dealing with errors in http client... this PR will fix that. |
Isn't 5.7.1 the release that introduced the regression and 5.7.2 the one that would fix it? |
@misterdjules that is correct... this is exactly why I didn't want to push out the release last night :P |
LGTM |
What do you mean by "the user-facing API"? Do you mean the API of It seems that
Also, it seems the only place in core where So my question is: could we just make |
Will open PR on master shortly. |
@misterdjules Just saw your comment. For 1. Will My concern is about making In all honesty this should change to use the |
Right, I misinterpreted that code and my analysis doesn't make sense, my apologies for the confusion :(
Yes, I had also missed that this PR was making the same change to
I saw you made that change in #5591, thank you!
That makes sense too. |
Pull Request check-list
make -j8 test
(UNIX) orvcbuild test nosign
(Windows) pass withthis change (including linting)?
test (or a benchmark) included?
existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?
Description
R=@misterdjules
R=@indutny
R=@thealphanerd