-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 557
Fix #4382: Fix thread leak in WSTP by replacing LinkedTransferQueue with SynchronousQueue and ConcurrentHashMap #4388
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
Draft
pantShrey
wants to merge
6
commits into
typelevel:series/3.6.x
Choose a base branch
from
pantShrey:wstp-thread-leak-4382
base: series/3.6.x
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and old review comments may become outdated.
+35
−23
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
16f2616
Switch to LinkedBlockingDeque for LIFO thread reuse to address WSTP t…
pantShrey c5f36ff
changed pollLast to pollFirst
pantShrey 869c954
added capacity to the LinkedBlockingDeque to simulate a synchronous d…
pantShrey cafe75a
implemented new approach of pool level SynchronousQueue[TransferStat…
pantShrey cbdad86
Fixed several inconsistencies and reimplemented the SynchronousQueue …
pantShrey 40a00ca
Reverted transferState
pantShrey 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 hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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.
If I remember correctly, I think one of the goals here is to avoid any allocations, in case the runtime was shutting down in a fatal condition (e.g. out-of-memory). Unfortunately, creating the iterator is an allocation. But, I don't know how to iterate the elements of a
ConcurrentHashMap
without an iterator 🤔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.
After searching I was also not able to find any allocation free method , it seems we might need to accept this small allocation as a trade-off, currently . I would still search for it and am open to suggestions for this.
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.
I'd have to retrace the code, but I think this is an area of secondary concern in terms of allocations. The critical path is ensuring that exceptions can propagate out to the
IO#unsafe
calling point without allocation. So long as that is achieved, everything else is gravy. Logically, I don't think WSTPshutdown
matters as much since, in any fatal error case, the process is torpedoed anyway and about to die.