Use asyncio.wait with timeout rather than sleep

[cottsay]

Resolves a RHEL regression caused by #571

Blocked by #575

• Linux
• Linux-aarch64
• Linux-RHEL
• macOS
• Windows

[sloretz]

I don't understand how this would avoid a hang why the original code would hang, but the change LGTM

[clalancette]

Unfortunately, I think this is going to bring the warning back on Jammy (Python 3.9). As far as I can tell, you can no longer pass a future directly to asyncio.wait, and you now have to wrap all futures in async tasks (see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66029772/alternative-to-asyncio-wait and https://bugs.python.org/issue34790).

Why that causes a hang in RHEL, I'm not sure. I guess we could do conditional code based on the version of Python that is in use?

[cottsay]

Unfortunately, I think this is going to bring the warning back on Jammy (Python 3.9)

I don't see how. #571 wrapped the asyncio.sleep coroutine in a task, and this change removes that sleep altogether in favor of the timeout argument to wait.

Why that causes a hang in RHEL, I'm not sure.

I really don't know either, but I didn't do very much investigation. Once I realized that the code could be simplified and found that it solved the hang, I moved on.

[hidmic]

LGTM, though I don't understand why the hang in RHEL either.

[clalancette]

Never mind, on Jammy this seems to work fine. So 👍 from me.