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

fix: timer task is time out or enqueue queue_, should run task immediately #2761

Conversation

wang007987
Copy link

@wang007987 wang007987 commented Jun 26, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Improvements
    • Enhanced thread execution control in the background processes for better performance and responsiveness.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 26, 2024

Walkthrough

The ThreadPool class in src/net/src/thread_pool.cc now includes a new boolean variable rsignal_wait in the runInThread() method. This variable determines whether the thread should wait for specific conditions on a condition variable rsignal_ before proceeding, thus enabling more flexible control over thread execution.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/net/src/thread_pool.cc Added a boolean variable rsignal_wait to the runInThread() method. Modified rsignal_.wait() to use conditional checks.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Thread as Thread
    participant ThreadPool as ThreadPool
    participant RSignal as RSignal

    Thread->>ThreadPool: start runInThread()
    ThreadPool->>RSignal: rsignal_wait check
    alt rsignal_wait is true
        ThreadPool->>RSignal: wait()
        RSignal-->>ThreadPool: signal received
    else rsignal_wait is false
        ThreadPool->>ThreadPool: continue without wait
    end
    ThreadPool->>Thread: execute task
Loading

Poem

In the realm of threads, a signal's cue,
With rsignal_wait, a change anew.
Some paths will pause, others flow,
Immediate tasks, with speed they go.
Threads dance wisely, in sync with fate,
A tune of code they orchestrate.

     ~ Coderabbit 🐇✨

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@wang007987 wang007987 changed the title timer task is time out or enqueue queue_, should run task immediately fix : timer task is time out or enqueue queue_, should run task immediately Jun 26, 2024
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0d71b24 and c71324c.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/net/src/thread_pool.cc (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
src/net/src/thread_pool.cc (1)

134-134: Review of runInThread modifications for immediate task execution.

The introduction of the rsignal_wait variable and its conditional logic are well-integrated into the existing structure of the method. The changes allow the thread to bypass waiting and proceed with task execution if conditions are met, aligning with the PR objectives.

However, the logic to reset rsignal_wait to true (line 140) after it has been set to false (line 161) might lead to unintended behavior. The condition to reset should be more clearly defined to avoid potential race conditions or logic errors.

-        rsignal_wait = true;
+        // Consider reviewing the condition under which rsignal_wait is reset to true to ensure it aligns with expected thread behavior.

Additionally, ensure that all external calls to runInThread are updated to pass the new rsignal_wait parameter. This is crucial as the method signature has changed.

Also applies to: 137-141, 159-162

Verification successful

No external calls to runInThread need updating.

The search results confirm that the runInThread method is only used internally within the thread_pool implementation. There are no external calls that need to be updated with the new rsignal_wait parameter.

  • src/net/include/thread_pool.h: Declaration of runInThread.
  • src/net/src/thread_pool.cc: Internal call to runInThread.
  • src/net/src/thread_pool.cc: Definition of runInThread.
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all external calls to `runInThread` are updated.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurances with the new signature.
rg --type cpp $'runInThread'

Length of output: 187

Copy link
Collaborator

@baerwang baerwang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

pls you format code and PR title style

@AlexStocks AlexStocks added bug ☢️ Bug Something isn't working 4.0.0 3.5.5 labels Jun 27, 2024
@AlexStocks AlexStocks changed the title fix : timer task is time out or enqueue queue_, should run task immediately fix: timer task is time out or enqueue queue_, should run task immediately Jun 27, 2024
@AlexStocks
Copy link
Collaborator

@CodiumAI-Agent /review

@CodiumAI-Agent
Copy link

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5] 3
🧪 Relevant tests No
🔒 Security concerns No
⚡ Key issues to review Possible Bug:
The logic to reset rsignal_wait to true after waiting might lead to unexpected behavior or race conditions. It's important to ensure that the condition !queue_.empty() || !time_queue_.empty() || should_stop() is still valid after the lock is released and before it's acquired again.
Performance Concern:
The use of rsignal_.wait_for with a dynamic wait time based on exec_time - unow could lead to performance issues if not handled correctly, especially in a high-load scenario. This needs careful review to ensure it does not introduce latency or inefficiency.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between c71324c and 16d3a9e.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/net/src/thread_pool.cc (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
src/net/src/thread_pool.cc (3)

159-162: Clarification needed on the logic to set rsignal_wait to false.

The comment indicates that the task should run immediately when the timer task is timed out or the queue is enqueued, but it's unclear how this aligns with the overall thread logic, especially since rsignal_wait is reset to true immediately after in the loop. This could lead to confusion or inefficiencies.

Consider adding more detailed comments or restructuring the logic to make the intent and flow clearer.


134-134: Initialization of rsignal_wait should be explicitly set when declared.

It's good practice to initialize variables explicitly to avoid any ambiguity about their initial state, especially in a multi-threaded context.

-  bool rsignal_wait;
+  bool rsignal_wait = true;

Likely invalid or redundant comment.


138-139: Ensure robust condition checking for rsignal_.wait.

The lambda condition !queue_.empty() || !time_queue_.empty() || should_stop() is crucial for the correct operation of the wait mechanism. However, there's a concern that this condition might not hold true between the release and re-acquisition of the lock, leading to potential race conditions.

Verification successful

Let's gather more information about the context around the rsignal_.wait call to ensure that the condition is robust and protected against race conditions.


Let's refine our search to locate the rsignal_ identifier and its surrounding context to verify the robustness of the condition.


Robust Condition Checking for rsignal_.wait Verified

The condition in rsignal_.wait is protected by a std::unique_lock on mu_, which ensures that race conditions are avoided. The condition checks for !queue_.empty() || !time_queue_.empty() || should_stop() are comprehensive and robust.

  • Location: runInThread method in src/net/src/thread_pool.cc
  • Lock: std::unique_lock on mu_ ensures thread-safe condition checking.
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the robustness of the condition in `rsignal_.wait`.

# Test: Manually trigger conditions to see if the wait exits prematurely.
# Expect: The thread should only proceed when the condition is truly met.
echo "Manual testing required to ensure robustness of the condition in rsignal_.wait."

Length of output: 168



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Locate the function that contains the `rsignal_.wait` call and extract its surrounding context.
ast-grep --lang cpp --pattern $'$_.wait($_, [this]() { return $_ || $_ || $_; });' --json

Length of output: 93



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Locate the `rsignal_` identifier and extract its surrounding context.
rg --context 10 'rsignal_' src/net/src/thread_pool.cc

Length of output: 2814

Comment on lines +137 to +141
if (rsignal_wait) {
rsignal_.wait(lock, [this]() { return !queue_.empty() || !time_queue_.empty() || should_stop(); });
} else {
rsignal_wait = true;
}
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Potential race condition due to the handling of rsignal_wait.

The logic to set rsignal_wait to true only after the condition check could lead to a scenario where rsignal_wait is not reset in time, causing the thread to skip necessary waits. This could introduce race conditions or unexpected behaviors, especially under high load.

Consider restructuring the logic to ensure rsignal_wait is appropriately managed to avoid such issues.

@AlexStocks
Copy link
Collaborator

@wang007987 thank you for your PR. U have done a great job. Have u joined our Wechat group?

@wangshao1
Copy link
Collaborator

加上这个逻辑之后,线程还是优先执行到期的timertask吧?
感觉这两个应该拆开,在一个线程中执行不太好。
另外,现在pika中应该是没有用到timer_task。

@Issues-translate-bot
Copy link

Bot detected the issue body's language is not English, translate it automatically.


After adding this logic, the thread should still give priority to executing the expired timertask, right?
It feels like these two should be separated, and it is not very good to execute them in one thread.
In addition, timer_task should not be used in pika now.

@QlQlqiqi
Copy link
Contributor

QlQlqiqi commented Jun 27, 2024

sry, I think your pr maybe unuseful. I guess that u maybe wanna do task immediately after waiting for timer task. Because it costs much time for waiting. When jumping into wait function, if task is not empty, the wait function will be out immediately and if task is empty, the wait function will be waiting. So i think there is no bug in logic.

不好意思,我认为你的 pr 作用不大,我认为你也许是想在等待完 timer task 后立刻执行 task,因为等待需要花费很长时间。当进入 wait 函数的时候,如果 task 为空,wait 函数会直接返回,如果不为空,就继续等。所以我认为这里没有逻辑 bug。

@wang007987 wang007987 closed this Jun 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3.5.5 4.0.0 bug ☢️ Bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants