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

gh-98703: Fix asyncio proactor_events calling _call_connection_lost multiple times #98704

Merged

Conversation

Fidget-Spinner
Copy link
Member

@Fidget-Spinner Fidget-Spinner commented Oct 26, 2022

@Fidget-Spinner
Copy link
Member Author

@kumaraditya303 I don't know why but this started showing on our tests after #98572. I can't tell if that PR introduced a bug or it just exposed something wrong with our implementation.

IMO, it seems it's something wrong with our implementation.

@kumaraditya303
Copy link
Contributor

asyncio always has surprises hence it is my favorite :)

Seriously though this has uncovered another race in our implementation. The code does not guard against concurrent closing of the stream which leads to this failure. The connection_lost callback should be called only once and here it is being called more than once.

Here's a better fix:

diff --git a/Lib/asyncio/proactor_events.py b/Lib/asyncio/proactor_events.py
index 2685a3376c..c6aab408fc 100644
--- a/Lib/asyncio/proactor_events.py
+++ b/Lib/asyncio/proactor_events.py
@@ -152,6 +152,8 @@ def _force_close(self, exc):
         self._loop.call_soon(self._call_connection_lost, exc)
 
     def _call_connection_lost(self, exc):
+        if self._called_connection_lost:
+            return
         try:
             self._protocol.connection_lost(exc)
         finally:

Feel free to update this PR with the patch above, I have verified this.

Co-Authored-By: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
@Fidget-Spinner
Copy link
Member Author

Feel free to update this PR with the patch above, I have verified this.

Awesome! Thank you for the fix. I was trying to find something more elegant but I'm a noob at asyncio internals :). Your fix is way nicer.

Co-Authored-By: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@kumaraditya303 kumaraditya303 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM thanks for the PR!

@kumaraditya303
Copy link
Contributor

I created #98730 to add tests for this.

Copy link
Member

@gvanrossum gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ironic.

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @Fidget-Spinner for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.10, 3.11.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@Fidget-Spinner Fidget-Spinner deleted the fix_asyncio_test_drain_release branch October 27, 2022 02:37
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry @Fidget-Spinner, I had trouble checking out the 3.11 backport branch.
Please retry by removing and re-adding the "needs backport to 3.11" label.
Alternatively, you can backport using cherry_picker on the command line.
cherry_picker 8a755423eba8e19704d96905730cf7f50083eb23 3.11

@bedevere-bot
Copy link

GH-98753 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.10 branch.

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Oct 27, 2022
…lost multiple times (pythonGH-98704)

Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit 8a75542)

Co-authored-by: Ken Jin <kenjin@python.org>
@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot removed the needs backport to 3.10 only security fixes label Oct 27, 2022
@Fidget-Spinner Fidget-Spinner added needs backport to 3.11 only security fixes and removed needs backport to 3.11 only security fixes labels Oct 27, 2022
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @Fidget-Spinner for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.11.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@bedevere-bot
Copy link

GH-98754 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch.

@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot removed the needs backport to 3.11 only security fixes label Oct 27, 2022
miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Oct 27, 2022
…lost multiple times (pythonGH-98704)

Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit 8a75542)

Co-authored-by: Ken Jin <kenjin@python.org>
miss-islington added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 27, 2022
…ultiple times (GH-98704)

Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit 8a75542)

Co-authored-by: Ken Jin <kenjin@python.org>
miss-islington added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 27, 2022
…ultiple times (GH-98704)

Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit 8a75542)

Co-authored-by: Ken Jin <kenjin@python.org>
gvanrossum pushed a commit to gvanrossum/cpython that referenced this pull request Oct 28, 2022
…lost multiple times (pythonGH-98704)

Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants