Worker thread throws error when started from `--require` script

[cspotcode]

• Version: 15.4.0
• Platform: Linux
• Subsystem: worker_threads

What steps will reproduce the bug?

Run the following at a bash shell:

touch empty.js
echo "new (require('worker_threads').Worker)('./empty.js')" > create-worker.js
node -r ./create-worker.js ./empty.js

How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?

It reproduces every time. It happens when the worker is created by a --require script.

What is the expected behavior?

No errors from the worker_thread.

What do you see instead?

Logs the following:

node:events:353
 throw er; // Unhandled 'error' event
 ^
TypeError [Error]: undefined is not an integer typed array.
 at Atomics.load (<anonymous>)
 at process.cwd (node:internal/main/worker_thread:140:38)
 at MessagePort.<anonymous> (node:internal/main/worker_thread:153:48)
 at MessagePort.[nodejs.internal.kHybridDispatch] (node:internal/event_target:422:41)
 at MessagePort.exports.emitMessage (node:internal/per_context/messageport:18:26)
Emitted 'error' event on process instance at:
 at emitUnhandledRejectionOrErr (node:internal/event_target:602:11)
 at MessagePort.[nodejs.internal.kHybridDispatch] (node:internal/event_target:426:9)
 at MessagePort.exports.emitMessage (node:internal/per_context/messageport:18:26)

Additional information

The line number referenced in the error is here: https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/lib/internal/main/worker_thread.js#L140

Based on a brief look at the code, I guess node is assuming that the worker receives a bootstrapping message with a bunch of values, one of them being cwdCounter. But when created via --require, that message is not sent or has not arrived yet.

[jasnell]

/cc @nodejs/workers

[addaleax]

Just switching the initialization order here should be fine, I think:

diff --git a/lib/internal/main/worker_thread.js b/lib/internal/main/worker_thread.js
index 7734aaa2c201..6c7c4acb3759 100644
--- a/lib/internal/main/worker_thread.js
+++ b/lib/internal/main/worker_thread.js
@@ -120,10 +120,6 @@ port.on('message', (message) => {
 initializeCJSLoader();
 initializeESMLoader();
 
- const CJSLoader = require('internal/modules/cjs/loader');
- assert(!CJSLoader.hasLoadedAnyUserCJSModule);
- loadPreloadModules();
- initializeFrozenIntrinsics();
 if (argv !== undefined) {
 process.argv = ArrayPrototypeConcat(process.argv, argv);
 }
@@ -146,6 +142,11 @@ port.on('message', (message) => {
 };
 workerIo.sharedCwdCounter = cwdCounter;
 
+ const CJSLoader = require('internal/modules/cjs/loader');
+ assert(!CJSLoader.hasLoadedAnyUserCJSModule);
+ loadPreloadModules();
+ initializeFrozenIntrinsics();
+
 if (!hasStdin)
 process.stdin.push(null);
 

Just note that your program still won’t work as it’s written right now, because Workers inherit their parent thread’s execArgv by default, and so they will also see -r create-worker.js, and spawn new Workers recursively.

[cspotcode]

When I catch the error with process.on('error', preventing the worker from terminating, I only see the one worker. It does not recursively spawn workers, even though the worker has stayed alive.

Are you saying that the fix you're proposing will cause it to start spawning workers recursively?

[addaleax]

Are you saying that the fix you're proposing will cause it to start spawning workers recursively?

Yes, that would be the expected (and documented) behavior for the code you shared here.

When I catch the error with process.on('error', preventing the worker from terminating, I only see the one worker. It does not recursively spawn workers, even though the worker has stayed alive.

That’s because the Worker never gets around to spawning its main script, I assume.

[cspotcode]

I can put setInterval(logAMessage, 1000) into the worker's JS file and see those messages logging from the worker. (When doing this, I'm not using empty.js in 2 different places) So the worker's main script does execute. But perhaps node's bootstrapping logic which handles --require gets terminated early by the error.

What is the recommended approach to avoid recursive thread spawning? Read workerData and check for a flag passed from the parent thread?

[targos]

require('worker_threads').isMainThread is false in worker threads

[addaleax]

@cspotcode Maybe to clarify: It’s not the first worker, the one you want to spawn, that throws the exception. It’s the inner, second worker, that’s already being spawned by the first one as a preload module, that fails.

So it’s not that Workers can’t be spawned from preload scripts in the main thread, it’s that Workers can’t be spawned from the preload scripts of other Worker threads.

[cspotcode]

Thanks for the clarification, I see what you mean. This is tricky.

If I'm writing a library that internally uses worker_threads to do useful things, and I want the library's implementation to be properly opaque, then I should always be passing an empty execArgv array to each worker thread, right? Otherwise users utilizing --require will accidentally have their code executed multiple times and possibly break my threads.

[cspotcode]

Is a preload script supposed to have access to workerData and argv synchronously, or does it need to wait asynchronously? I'm not sure if I should file that as a separate bug or if it's intended.

[addaleax]

If I'm writing a library that internally uses worker_threads to do useful things, and I want the library's implementation to be properly opaque, then I should always be passing an empty execArgv array to each worker thread, right? Otherwise users utilizing --require will accidentally have their code executed multiple times and possibly break my threads.

I mean, that really depends … it’s hard to know what the correct behavior would be without knowing the concrete circumstances. Sometimes a user using --require might want their script also loaded in Workers, sometimes not, I guess.

Is a preload script supposed to have access to workerData and argv synchronously, or does it need to wait asynchronously?

I think it should have that, yes.

I'm not sure if I should file that as a separate bug or if it's intended.

🤷‍♀️ The patch that I suggested above would also resolve this problem as well. You can open a PR with it, if you like, it just needs a test to come with, I think.