This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 18, 2024. It is now read-only.
Write before poll, fix CI failures #21
Merged
Conversation
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
decathorpe
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2022
| let mut remove_conns = Vec::new(); | ||
|
|
||
| let mut send_py_permit: Option<Permit<TransportEvent>> = None; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit-pick: why send_py_permit and not py_tx_permit? The different naming scheme confused me at first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, fair point. Let's change it. 👍
| if send_py_permit.is_none() { | ||
| send_py_permit = self.py_tx.try_reserve().ok(); | ||
| } | ||
| let can_send_net = self.net_tx.capacity() > 0; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same question here: Weird name for this variable. For example, using net_tx_full and inverting the logic would be more clear.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR fixes the CI failures over at mitmproxy/mitmproxy: https://github.com/mitmproxy/mitmproxy/actions/runs/3374019278/jobs/5599200642
The problem here is as follows:
sock.sendPreviously, the following Drain would always trigger another loop. This PR changes it so that we send before polling. I need to go over this tomorrow again with a fresh mind to check if that's enough. I could imagine some weird read/flow control interactions as well which may require us to poll first, then handle sockets, and then poll again.