fix(headless-client): don't fuse futures outside of the loop#7287
Merged
thomaseizinger merged 2 commits intomainfrom Nov 8, 2024
Merged
fix(headless-client): don't fuse futures outside of the loop#7287thomaseizinger merged 2 commits intomainfrom
thomaseizinger merged 2 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
When waiting on multiple futures concurrently within a loop, it is important that they all get re-created whenever one of them resolves. Currently, due to the
.fusecall, the SIGHUP signal can only be sent once and future signals get ignored.As a more general fix, I swapped the
futures::select!macro to thetokio::select!macro which allows referencing these futures without pinning and fusing. Ideally, we'd not use any of these macros here and write our own eventloop but that is a larger refactoring.