worker: add name for worker by theanarkh · Pull Request #59213 · nodejs/node

theanarkh · 2025-07-25T16:05:28Z

In some scenarios, name is very useful(such as in the APM SDK) and easier to understand.

const { Worker } = require('worker_threads');

process.on('worker', (worker) => {
  // output: test-worker-thread-name in main thread
  console.log(worker.threadName + " in main thread");
});

new Worker(`
  const { threadName } = require('worker_threads');
  // output: test-worker-thread-name in worker thread
  console.log(threadName + " in worker thread");
`, { eval: true, name: 'test-worker-thread-name' });

make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
tests and/or benchmarks are included
documentation is changed or added
commit message follows commit guidelines

codecov · 2025-07-25T17:38:57Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.00%. Comparing base (04c5a18) to head (6f7e498).
⚠️ Report is 56 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #59213      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.04%   90.00%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         648      649       +1     
  Lines      191200   192219    +1019     
  Branches    37472    37659     +187     
==========================================
+ Hits       172160   173006     +846     
- Misses      11665    11826     +161     
- Partials     7375     7387      +12

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
lib/internal/worker.js	`98.83% <100.00%> (+0.01%)`	⬆️
lib/worker_threads.js	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/api/environment.cc	`77.05% <100.00%> (+0.23%)`	⬆️
src/env-inl.h	`94.23% <100.00%> (+0.02%)`	⬆️
src/env.cc	`80.64% <100.00%> (-0.41%)`	⬇️
src/env.h	`98.14% <ø> (ø)`
src/node.h	`92.30% <ø> (ø)`
src/node_worker.cc	`84.57% <100.00%> (+1.37%)`	⬆️

... and 43 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

addaleax

LGTM!

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-07-27T03:53:25Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/68227/

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-07-27T06:44:23Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/68229/

github-actions · 2025-07-28T10:54:20Z

Failed to start CI

   ⚠  Commits were pushed since the last approving review:
   ⚠  - worker: add name for worker
   ✘  Refusing to run CI on potentially unsafe PR

https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/16567111188

theanarkh · 2025-07-29T13:10:50Z

@addaleax Hi! I modified the test example to support creating worker in worker. Could you help review again ? Thanks !

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-07-29T14:52:03Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/68298/

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-08-04T13:02:36Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/68402/

jasnell · 2025-08-04T13:20:22Z

+
+const name = 'test-worker-thread-name';
+
+if (workerData?.isWorker) {


It looks like the workerData?.isWorker is here only to determine if you're running in a worker or not. You can use isMainThread for that purpose and simplify this a bit.

const { Worker, isMainThread } = require('worker_threads'); if (!isMainThread) { // This is running in a worker } else { // This is running in the main thread }

workerData?.isWorker is designed to support the creation of worker within worker.

Is that actually necessary tho? I would just make this test as a whole not run in a worker.

We also need to support this use case, so should we support this kind of test ?

jasnell · 2025-08-04T13:21:23Z

+
+if (workerData?.isWorker) {
+  assert.strictEqual(threadName, name);
+  process.exit(0);


There should be no reason for process.exit(0) here.

ghost · 2025-08-04T13:24:48Z

 (if there is any), it is available as [`worker.threadId`][].
 This value is unique for each [`Worker`][] instance inside a single process.

+## `worker.threadName`


Just a nit since I see we don't do this with the other properties here so feel free to ignore, but it would be ideal if the docs were clear that this is a read-only property. (same goes for the other read-only properties here)

ghost · 2025-08-04T13:26:34Z

+    if (this[kHandle] === null) return null;
+
+    return this[kHandle].threadName;


I believe you could simplify this a bit as...

Suggested change

if (this[kHandle] === null) return null;

return this[kHandle].threadName;

return this[kHandle]?.threadName || null;

I will optimize it in another pr.Thanks.

ghost · 2025-08-04T15:23:31Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/68409/

ghost · 2025-08-04T16:22:56Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/68410/

ghost · 2025-08-05T13:45:43Z

Landed in 3090def

nodejs-github-bot added c++ Issues and PRs that require attention from people who are familiar with C++. lib / src Issues and PRs involving general changes in the lib/ or src/ directories. needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. labels Jul 25, 2025

theanarkh added the worker Issues and PRs related to the worker_threads module and Worker API. label Jul 25, 2025

theanarkh force-pushed the add_name_for_worker branch 3 times, most recently from 8cffc77 to db88135 Compare July 25, 2025 16:48

addaleax reviewed Jul 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/node.h Outdated

theanarkh force-pushed the add_name_for_worker branch 3 times, most recently from c59afff to cf60597 Compare July 26, 2025 18:37

addaleax approved these changes Jul 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

theanarkh added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Jul 27, 2025

github-actions Bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Jul 27, 2025

theanarkh force-pushed the add_name_for_worker branch from cf60597 to 854c313 Compare July 27, 2025 09:04

theanarkh added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Jul 28, 2025

github-actions Bot added request-ci-failed Starting CI with the request-ci label failed and requires manual intervention. and removed request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. labels Jul 28, 2025

theanarkh force-pushed the add_name_for_worker branch from 854c313 to 42df3d9 Compare July 28, 2025 14:44

addaleax approved these changes Jul 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

theanarkh added request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. and removed request-ci-failed Starting CI with the request-ci label failed and requires manual intervention. labels Jul 29, 2025

github-actions Bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Jul 29, 2025

jasnell reviewed Jul 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/node_worker.cc Outdated

theanarkh requested review from addaleax and jasnell July 31, 2025 09:56

addaleax approved these changes Aug 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

theanarkh added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Aug 4, 2025

github-actions Bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Aug 4, 2025

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

jasnell reviewed Aug 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

jasnell approved these changes Aug 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

theanarkh added author ready PRs with CI started, the required approvals, and no outstanding review comments. commit-queue PRs queued for automated landing through the Commit Queue. labels Aug 5, 2025

nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue PRs queued for automated landing through the Commit Queue. label Aug 5, 2025

nodejs-github-bot merged commit 3090def into nodejs:main Aug 5, 2025

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Aug 11, 2025

2025-08-12, Version 24.6.0 (Current) #59449

Merged

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Sep 22, 2025

2025-09-24, Version 22.20.0 'Jod' (LTS) #59973

Merged

sxa mentioned this pull request Feb 9, 2026

Various AIX tests pass on Node 22, fail on later supported versions #61657

Open


		const name = 'test-worker-thread-name';

		if (workerData?.isWorker) {

		if (this[kHandle] === null) return null;

		return this[kHandle].threadName;

Uh oh!

Conversation

theanarkh commented Jul 25, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jul 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

addaleax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Jul 27, 2025

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Jul 27, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

theanarkh commented Jul 29, 2025

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Jul 29, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

This comment was marked as outdated.

nodejs-github-bot commented Aug 4, 2025

Uh oh!

jasnell Aug 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

theanarkh Aug 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jasnell Aug 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

theanarkh Aug 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jasnell Aug 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ghost Aug 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ghost Aug 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ghost Aug 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ghost commented Aug 4, 2025

Uh oh!

ghost commented Aug 4, 2025

Uh oh!

ghost commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

codecov Bot commented Jul 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading