-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
bridge: fix shutdown of not running bridge #453
Conversation
Warning Rate Limit Exceeded@jkralik has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 20 minutes and 8 seconds before requesting another review. How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. WalkthroughThe update introduces significant synchronization changes in both the Changes
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? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- bridge/service/service.go (5 hunks)
Additional comments: 3
bridge/service/service.go (3)
- 70-70: The addition of
sync.WaitGroup
to theService
struct is correctly implemented and aligns with the objective of enhancing the shutdown process synchronization.- 158-159: The modifications to the
Serve
method, incorporatingwg.Add(1)
anddefer c.wg.Done()
, are correctly implemented and enhance the synchronization mechanism as intended.- 168-168: The update to the
Shutdown
method to usec.wg.Wait()
for waiting on goroutines to finish is correctly implemented. However, consider adding error handling for the device closure process to ensure that any errors encountered during device shutdown are appropriately managed.
ac82beb
to
173d428
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (2)
- bridge/net/network.go (4 hunks)
- bridge/service/service.go (5 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- bridge/service/service.go
Additional comments: 4
bridge/net/network.go (4)
- 57-58: The addition of
stopped
andwg
fields to theNet
struct is a good practice for managing the lifecycle and concurrency of the network service. However, it's important to ensure that these new mechanisms are used consistently throughout the code to prevent race conditions or deadlocks.- 362-364: The goroutine started in the
New
function for managing cache expirations is correctly synchronized with thesync.WaitGroup
. This ensures that the service can wait for this goroutine to finish during shutdown, which is a good practice for clean resource management.- 424-426: Checking if the service has already been stopped at the beginning of the
Serve
method is a good practice. It prevents the service from starting if it's already in a stopped state, which can help avoid unexpected behavior.- 455-459: The
Close
method correctly usesCompareAndSwap
to ensure that the service is only stopped once. This atomic operation prevents concurrent calls toClose
from interfering with each other. Additionally, waiting for all goroutines to finish before closing the servers is a good practice for clean shutdowns.
173d428
to
c426eff
Compare
c426eff
to
7373ae7
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (4)
- bridge/device/cloud/manager.go (3 hunks)
- bridge/device/device.go (4 hunks)
- bridge/net/network.go (4 hunks)
- bridge/service/service.go (5 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- bridge/net/network.go
- bridge/service/service.go
Additional comments: 4
bridge/device/device.go (2)
- 26-26: The use of
sync/atomic
for thestopped
field is valid and achieves the intended functionality of preventing multiple closures of theDevice
. However, for simplicity and more idiomatic Go code, consider usingatomic.Bool
from thego.uber.org/atomic
package for boolean flags.Also applies to: 73-73
- 298-306: > 📝 NOTE
This review was outside the diff hunks and was mapped to the diff hunk with the greatest overlap. Original lines [301-314]
The modifications to the
Close
method correctly use thestopped
atomic boolean to ensure that the method's logic is executed only once. This is an effective way to prevent potential race conditions or redundant operations during shutdown.bridge/device/cloud/manager.go (2)
- 28-28: The use of
sync/atomic
for thestopped
field is valid and achieves the intended functionality of preventing multiple closures of theManager
. However, for simplicity and more idiomatic Go code, consider usingatomic.Bool
from thego.uber.org/atomic
package for boolean flags.Also applies to: 100-100
- 534-537: The modifications to the
Close
method correctly use thestopped
atomic boolean to ensure that the method's logic is executed only once. This is an effective way to prevent potential race conditions or redundant operations during shutdown.
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #453 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 76.81% 76.87% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 115 115
Lines 6702 6710 +8
==========================================
+ Hits 5148 5158 +10
+ Misses 1015 1013 -2
Partials 539 539 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
Summary by CodeRabbit