Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

src: limit foreground tasks draining loop #19987

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from
Closed

src: limit foreground tasks draining loop #19987

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
66a7421
src: limit foreground tasks draining loop
ulan Apr 12, 2018
4dbc4aa
[squash] clarify the comment of flushing
ulan Apr 13, 2018
c435401
[squash] fix the repost count in the new test.
ulan Apr 16, 2018
167ae0e
[squash] drain all tasks in inspector-agent.
ulan Apr 20, 2018
f46763b
[squash] fix comment s/iff/if/.
ulan Apr 20, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion src/inspector_agent.cc
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ class NodeInspectorClient : public V8InspectorClient {
terminated_ = false;
running_nested_loop_ = true;
while (!terminated_ && channel_->waitForFrontendMessage()) {
platform_->FlushForegroundTasks(env_->isolate());
while (platform_->FlushForegroundTasks(env_->isolate())) {}
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Doesn't this line preserve the bug? Because, even though you swap the queue before draining it, you're still running this loop forever if new tasks are constantly added to the original queue

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The inspector posts foreground tasks and requires that they are all processed before going to the outer loop.

AFAIK this code runs only when the inspector is active and the program is paused. The normal libuv tasks are not processed here. Latency shouldn't be an issue.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that the original bug this is trying to fix (#19937) is that there are cases where foreground tasks can add additional tasks to the queue. The bug was fixed by freezing the queue inside of FlushForegroundTasks, but this line of code I'm commenting on appears to loop THAT CALL so that the freeze fix doesn't actually help anything. It still will run forever, if foreground tasks add themselves.

Unless there's more than one place where FlushForegroundTasks is being called, and that's not an issue for this line?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is certainly more than one place. This particular line addresses a very specific interaction.

}
terminated_ = false;
running_nested_loop_ = false;
Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions src/node_platform.cc
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -260,8 +260,8 @@ void NodePlatform::CallDelayedOnForegroundThread(Isolate* isolate,
std::unique_ptr<Task>(task), delay_in_seconds);
}

void NodePlatform::FlushForegroundTasks(v8::Isolate* isolate) {
ForIsolate(isolate)->FlushForegroundTasksInternal();
bool NodePlatform::FlushForegroundTasks(v8::Isolate* isolate) {
return ForIsolate(isolate)->FlushForegroundTasksInternal();
}

void NodePlatform::CancelPendingDelayedTasks(v8::Isolate* isolate) {
Expand Down
11 changes: 7 additions & 4 deletions src/node_platform.h
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,9 +66,9 @@ class PerIsolatePlatformData :
void ref();
int unref();

// Returns true iff work was dispatched or executed.
// New tasks that are posted during flushing of the queue are postponed until
// the next flushing.
// Returns true iff work was dispatched or executed. New tasks that are
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: s/iff/if.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@apapirovski I guess these were intentional?

Copy link
Member

@apapirovski apapirovski Apr 20, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah but I know the meaning and I didn't even think of it until you mentioned it... but maybe that just reflects badly on me... 🤔 😆

Copy link
Member

@apapirovski apapirovski Apr 20, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess what I'm saying: I don't think this is the place for iff. It doesn't make it clearer.

But I'm not going to object if someone prefers this. It's a low priority thing for me.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done. The iff was there before my change. I agree that if seems slightly better.

// posted during flushing of the queue are postponed until the next
// flushing.
bool FlushForegroundTasksInternal();
void CancelPendingDelayedTasks();

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -133,7 +133,10 @@ class NodePlatform : public MultiIsolatePlatform {
double CurrentClockTimeMillis() override;
v8::TracingController* GetTracingController() override;

void FlushForegroundTasks(v8::Isolate* isolate);
// Returns true iff work was dispatched or executed. New tasks that are
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same here, s/iff/if

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

// posted during flushing of the queue are postponed until the next
// flushing.
bool FlushForegroundTasks(v8::Isolate* isolate);

void RegisterIsolate(IsolateData* isolate_data, uv_loop_t* loop) override;
void UnregisterIsolate(IsolateData* isolate_data) override;
Expand Down
7 changes: 4 additions & 3 deletions test/cctest/test_platform.cc
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -45,10 +45,11 @@ TEST_F(PlatformTest, SkipNewTasksInFlushForegroundTasks) {
int run_count = 0;
platform->CallOnForegroundThread(
isolate_, new RepostingTask(2, &run_count, isolate_, platform.get()));
platform->FlushForegroundTasks(isolate_);
EXPECT_TRUE(platform->FlushForegroundTasks(isolate_));
EXPECT_EQ(1, run_count);
platform->FlushForegroundTasks(isolate_);
EXPECT_TRUE(platform->FlushForegroundTasks(isolate_));
EXPECT_EQ(2, run_count);
platform->FlushForegroundTasks(isolate_);
EXPECT_TRUE(platform->FlushForegroundTasks(isolate_));
EXPECT_EQ(3, run_count);
EXPECT_FALSE(platform->FlushForegroundTasks(isolate_));
}