Force cfunc in queue_work's work_cb and add test for it. #32
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
|
SGTM |
mattn
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 19, 2014
Force cfunc in queue_work's work_cb and add test for it.
|
Than you |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 changes is to make API
UV.queue_workmore safer.Since
uv_work_cbwould be always runned on separate thread as mruby runs, running block on it will break running context of mruby.On new mruby-uv
uv_work_cb, it can only run cfunc proc that can run separately withmrb_statethat is passed toUV.queue_workas argument.(The cfunc would be called with arguments
NULL, mrb_nil_value()and returned value would be discarded.)And the block passed to
UV.queue_workwould be runned onuv_after_work_cb.(See the test codes for detail. It will run summing of 0 to 99 on other thread.)