fs: add signal option to fs.stat()

[mertcanaltin]

add signal option to fs.stat() for #57751

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.22%. Comparing base (d89657c) to head (7c66528).
⚠️ Report is 2109 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #57775      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.24%   90.22%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         635      635              
  Lines      187588   187596       +8     
  Branches    36860    36858       -2     
==========================================
- Hits       169292   169266      -26     
- Misses      11060    11111      +51     
+ Partials     7236     7219      -17     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
lib/fs.js	98.27% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

... and 27 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.

[LiviaMedeiros]

The commit message after subsystem should start with imperative verb and probably be more specific, maybe something like fs: add signal option to fs.stat()?

[mertcanaltin]

The commit message after subsystem should start with imperative verb and probably be more specific, maybe something like fs: add signal option to fs.stat()?

thank you very much, I will be more careful with this, sometimes I make the wrong sentence 🙏

[nodejs-github-bot]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/66196/

[LiviaMedeiros]

Doesn't necessarily have to be in scope of this PR, but i think we'll also need signal option for Sync and Promises API of this function, and also for the lstat version; ideally within same semver-minor release so there's no discrepancy between these functions.

[targos]

Test is writing a temporary file in the cwd. It should use common API instead

[jasnell]

@mertcanaltin ... can you please remove the merge commit from this and use rebase instead to catch it up?

[mertcanaltin]

@mertcanaltin ... can you please remove the merge commit from this and use rebase instead to catch it up?

thank you I used rebase

[nodejs-github-bot]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/66366/ 💛

[BridgeAR]

This adds quite a lot of complexity. Is that something we really want to support? I feel like a stat call should be fine not to be able to abort?
I am going to run the benchmarks to see how much overhead this adds for the common case.

https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1719/

[mertcanaltin]

@BridgeAR I looked at this benchmark, but the benchmark result fails. Can you restart this benchmark line?

[jasnell]

On the question of whether we really want to support this, I'm fine in general with the change but I also don't see it as being all that useful given the additional complexity.

[mertcanaltin]

hello I tried to fix the complex structure

[nodejs-github-bot]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/71486/

[nodejs-github-bot]

Landed in 7b6a072