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.

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

chain head listener: workaround watcher deadlock #2982

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 18, 2021

Conversation

leoyvens
Copy link
Collaborator

With the logs we were able to confirm that this deadlocks within the tokio watcher implementation, this has been reported upstream tokio-rs/tokio#4246. This PR hacks around that until it is fixed by detecting a deadlocked watcher and continuing to pull notifications, if only to discard them.

if !sending_to_watcher.load(atomic::Ordering::SeqCst) {
let sending_to_watcher = sending_to_watcher.cheap_clone();
let sender = watcher.sender.cheap_clone();
tokio::task::spawn_blocking(move || {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can that lead to a large number of dead threads hanging around? Maybe we need another watcher_is_live: Arc<AtomicBool> that is set to false just before the call to send and set to true right afterwards where we do not try to send if watcher_is_live is false.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe the sending_to_watcher is already serving as the check you propose.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, of course, you are right.

@@ -173,9 +178,19 @@ impl ChainHeadUpdateListener {

// If there are subscriptions for this network, notify them.
if let Some(watcher) = watchers.read(&logger).get(&update.network_name) {
debug!(logger, "sending chain head update"; "network" => &update.network_name);
watcher.send();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We didn't unwrap this call before?

let sender = watcher.sender.cheap_clone();
tokio::task::spawn_blocking(move || {
sending_to_watcher.store(true, atomic::Ordering::SeqCst);
sender.send(()).unwrap();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see that watcher.send() didn't receive any arguments before, why is it receiving a unit () value now?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Before we were using the send on our watcher struct, which is now dead code until we can revert this hack.

@leoyvens
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@lutter @otaviopace thanks for the review, comments addressed.

if !sending_to_watcher.load(atomic::Ordering::SeqCst) {
let sending_to_watcher = sending_to_watcher.cheap_clone();
let sender = watcher.sender.cheap_clone();
tokio::task::spawn_blocking(move || {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, of course, you are right.

@leoyvens leoyvens merged commit 881d078 into master Nov 18, 2021
@leoyvens leoyvens deleted the leo/workaround-watcher-deadlock branch November 18, 2021 17:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants