-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
Ensure sender channel is not dropped until receiver reads exit request #82
Open
kquick
wants to merge
1
commit into
travitch:master
Choose a base branch
from
kquick:dgb_1731272708-0
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, I'm a bit skeptical that this was the issue - resources are freed at the end of their scope, which is somewhat after this
drop
. Thejoin
should have always joined before the channel was released before.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The
sender.send
ends in a?
, which is a choice point that will end the basic block in which thesend
was called. Rust's Non-Lexical Lifetimes (NLL, https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2094-nll.html) would then be able to conclude that sincesender
was unused in the remainder of the CFG that it could be removed at that point, which is prior to the threadjoin
and could therefore open this race window.Without explicit examination of the compilation output, I can't be sure of this, but NLL appears to be deployed (https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/08/05/nll-by-default.html), so it is a likely culprit. Do you have any ideas for other culprits?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is the error you are observing occurring sporadically or deterministically?
I can't tell from the NLL RFC if it affects when destructors are called or if it is just about lifetime scope computation.
I'd just be really surprised if this was the culprit... in cases where
sender.send(None)
fails (i.e.,?
causes the early return), that means the other thread already crashed (or some crazy OOM). That call might as well be.unwrap()
. Maybe we should just do that?In cases where it isn't crashing, the queue is definitely still live until the
.join()
returns (or the.unwrap()
on that line fails).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh and as for my hypothesis for the underlying cause: I think the real error might be in the ptrace code. I see
Error: Tracee died while in ptrace-stop
in #81. I am pretty confident that there is at least one gnarly race condition in the ptrace code (either in build-bom or the ptrace wrapper).