-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.7k
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
test: move test-shadow-realm-gc.js to known_issues #47355
Conversation
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix.
|
Co-authored-by: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com>
Landed in 0361978 |
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix. PR-URL: #47355 Refs: #47353 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix. PR-URL: #47355 Refs: #47353 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix. PR-URL: #47355 Refs: #47353 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
Hi @joyeecheung! This commit didn't land cleanly on v19.x-staging because there are no |
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix. PR-URL: nodejs#47355 Refs: nodejs#47353 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix. PR-URL: #47355 Refs: #47353 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix. PR-URL: #47355 Refs: #47353 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix. PR-URL: nodejs#47355 Refs: nodejs#47353 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
There is actually a leak. The test doesn't exercise the right path to create a substantial enough object graph (e.g. accessing something that results in the loading of a binding). This does something more complicated in the test and moves it to known_issues until we find a fix.
Refs: #47353