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

Jump to bottom

[JENKINS-52165] Disable watch mode by default for now #84

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Oct 24, 2018
Merged

[JENKINS-52165] Disable watch mode by default for now #84

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6b69667
[JENKINS-52165] Disable watch mode by default for now.
jglick Oct 24, 2018
e47a64f
[JENKINS-28822] Extend fix from #75 to non-watch mode.
jglick Oct 24, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
24 changes: 13 additions & 11 deletions src/main/java/org/jenkinsci/plugins/workflow/steps/durable_task/DurableTaskStep.java
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
import hudson.FilePath;
import hudson.Functions;
import hudson.Launcher;
import hudson.Main;
import hudson.Util;
import hudson.model.Node;
import hudson.model.TaskListener;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -170,7 +171,7 @@ interface ExecutionRemotable {
/** If set to false, disables {@link Execution#watching} mode. */
@SuppressFBWarnings(value = "MS_SHOULD_BE_FINAL", justification = "public & mutable only for tests")
@Restricted(NoExternalUse.class)
public static boolean USE_WATCHING = !"false".equals(System.getProperty(DurableTaskStep.class.getName() + ".USE_WATCHING"));
public static boolean USE_WATCHING = Boolean.parseBoolean(System.getProperty(DurableTaskStep.class.getName() + ".USE_WATCHING", Main.isUnitTest ? "true" : /* JENKINS-52165 turn back on by default */ "false"));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems undesirable to not actually test using the mode that we are shipping to users, but I also see why it would be good to test against watch mode since any issues in downstream plugins are likely to be specific to that mode, so I am somewhat split on this.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems undesirable to not actually test using the mode that we are shipping to users

Indeed. On the other hand the non-watch mode has been tested for years, and I certainly hope this situation will be temporary.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm okay with this part -- not perfect but it'll do. Just trying to check that the exit condition stuff is 100% the same internally.


/**
* Represents one task that is believed to still be running.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -466,14 +467,7 @@ private void check() {
if (controller.writeLog(workspace, listener.getLogger())) {
LOGGER.log(Level.FINE, "last-minute output in {0} on {1}", new Object[] {remote, node});
}
if (returnStatus || exitCode == 0) {
getContext().onSuccess(returnStatus ? exitCode : returnStdout ? new String(controller.getOutput(workspace, launcher()), StandardCharsets.UTF_8) : null);
} else {
if (returnStdout) {
listener.getLogger().write(controller.getOutput(workspace, launcher())); // diagnostic
}
getContext().onFailure(new AbortException("script returned exit code " + exitCode));
}
handleExit(exitCode, () -> controller.getOutput(workspace, launcher()));
recurrencePeriod = 0;
controller.cleanup(workspace);
}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -507,12 +501,20 @@ private void check() {
return;
}
recurrencePeriod = 0;
handleExit(exitCode, () -> output);
}

@FunctionalInterface
private interface OutputSupplier {
byte[] produce() throws IOException, InterruptedException;
}
private void handleExit(int exitCode, OutputSupplier output) throws IOException, InterruptedException {
Throwable originalCause = causeOfStoppage;
if ((returnStatus && originalCause == null) || exitCode == 0) {
getContext().onSuccess(returnStatus ? exitCode : returnStdout ? new String(output, StandardCharsets.UTF_8) : null);
getContext().onSuccess(returnStatus ? exitCode : returnStdout ? new String(output.produce(), StandardCharsets.UTF_8) : null);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🐜 Nested ternary operators are super hard to read for most developers without line breaks between them

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Perhaps. Anyway that predates this PR.

} else {
if (returnStdout) {
listener().getLogger().write(output); // diagnostic
listener().getLogger().write(output.produce()); // diagnostic
}
if (originalCause != null) {
// JENKINS-28822: Use the previous cause instead of throwing a new AbortException
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion src/test/java/org/jenkinsci/plugins/workflow/steps/durable_task/ShellStepTest.java
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ private Object writeReplace() {
j.waitForCompletion(b);
// Would have succeeded before https://github.com/jenkinsci/workflow-durable-task-step-plugin/pull/75.
j.assertBuildStatus(Result.ABORTED, b);
j.assertLogContains("Timeout has been exceeded", b);
j.waitForMessage("Timeout has been exceeded", b); // TODO assertLogContains fails unless a sleep is introduced; possible race condition in waitForCompletion
Copy link
Member

@dwnusbaum dwnusbaum Oct 24, 2018 •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I saw this as well, although it passed sometimes in my local testing, so some kind of race condition seems likely.

}

/**
Expand Down