test: make test-cli-node-options more robust

[Trott]

The test launches over 20 processes asynchronously. That may be too many
for underpowered machines in CI with limited PID space.

Fixes: #25028

Checklist

• make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
• commit message follows commit guidelines

[nodejs-github-bot]

@Trott Sadly, an error occurred when I tried to trigger a build. :(

[nodejs-github-bot]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/22016/

[Trott]

Stress test against master: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-stress-single-test/2196/nodes=ubuntu1604-arm64/

Stress test against this PR: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-stress-single-test/nodes=ubuntu1604-arm64/2197/ (scheduled)

[Trott]

Welp, that didn't go as planned....

10:26:19 not ok 445 parallel/test-cli-node-options
10:26:19   ---
10:26:19   duration_ms: 7.544
10:26:19   severity: fail
10:26:19   exitcode: 1
10:26:19   stack: |-
10:26:19     /home/iojs/build/workspace/node-test-commit-arm/nodes/ubuntu1604-arm64/test/parallel/test-cli-node-options.js:83
10:26:19           throw e;
10:26:19           ^
10:26:19     
10:26:19     Error: Command failed: /home/iojs/build/workspace/node-test-commit-arm/nodes/ubuntu1604-arm64/out/Release/node -e console.log("B")
10:26:19     
10:26:19     
10:26:19     #
10:26:19     # Fatal error in , line 0
10:26:19     # Check failed: (perf_output_handle_) != nullptr.
10:26:19     #
10:26:19     #
10:26:19     #
10:26:19     #FailureMessage Object: 0xffffe677c798
10:26:19         at checkExecSyncError (child_process.js:622:11)
10:26:19         at execFileSync (child_process.js:640:13)
10:26:19         at expect (/home/iojs/build/workspace/node-test-commit-arm/nodes/ubuntu1604-arm64/test/parallel/test-cli-node-options.js:80:14)
10:26:19         at Object.<anonymous> (/home/iojs/build/workspace/node-test-commit-arm/nodes/ubuntu1604-arm64/test/parallel/test-cli-node-options.js:43:3)
10:26:19         at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:837:30)
10:26:19         at Object.Module._extensions..js (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:848:10)
10:26:19         at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:704:32)
10:26:19         at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:636:12)
10:26:19         at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:628:3)
10:26:19         at Function.Module.runMain (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:903:10)
10:26:19   ...

[addaleax]

Btw, I’d personally say that it’s not bad to test that we can spawn a large-ish number of child processes which do very little work each all at once, no matter what the outcome here is.

[Trott]

Btw, I’d personally say that it’s not bad to test that we can spawn a large-ish number of child processes which do very little work each all at once, no matter what the outcome here is.

Agreed. I'd prefer a test be specifically designed to test that, rather than it be a side effect of an otherwise unrelated test. In fact, I think we already have a test like that: test/pummel/test-child-process-spawn-loop.js (EDIT: Of course, a big limitation of that test being in pummel is that it doesn't get run in CI on Windows etc.)