-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.9k
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
Use a Thread instead of an ExecutorService for Starlark repository workers #22139
Closed
+185
−158
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
0969c57
Hold on to the worker executor service in RepoFetching
Wyverald 4a84f30
Failed attempt to directly use a Thread for repo fetching
Wyverald 36216c8
Fix a deadlock in Starlark repository workers.
lberki 72707a9
Use an Exchanger to rendezvous between the worker and Skyframe threads.
lberki File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
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
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
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.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This goes against the comment on line 64 (ie. we're not supposed to block in close()).
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 realize that this is not supposed to block, but in my not-so-humble opinion it's much better to block a bit than to have unaccounted for state floating around for an unspecified amount of time. This is especially bad because the worker thread can have side effects visible outside of Bazel (since it can do I/O, write files, read files, etc., all from user code) and it sounds like a terrible idea to have that going on without the knowledge of the rest of Bazel.
That said, my sticking point is not that we block here, it's that we don't do anything with side effects outside of the worker thread after this method returns so if you have any clever ideas as to how to implement that without blocking, I'm all ears.
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.
Isn't that why we block in the host thread? The memory pressure listener thread just interrupts the worker thread, and it's the host thread's job to make sure the worker is finished before moving on. It's not necessary that the worker thread is terminated right after
close()
.