chore: non preemptive ProtocolClient destructor #5927
Merged
Conversation
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
|
@romange you asked here to deprecate To clarify, you mean |
kostasrim
commented
Oct 17, 2025
| break; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| CloseSocket(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@BorysTheDev is there any other place that I forgot to CloseSocket() ?
Signed-off-by: kostas <[email protected]>
romange
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2025
dranikpg
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2025
BorysTheDev
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2025
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Preempting in the destructor of ProtocolClient is error prone when a thread local shared_ptr releases the underline object as part of an (operator=) assignment statement. The assignment on the thread local will block while the ProtocolClient is released and another fiber can grab a copy of it while the object is in a mixed state.
Furthermore, there is a data race in
GetSummary()andProtocolClient::Sock()initialization. Even thoughSock()is not yet initialized, we know prior on which proactor its fiber will run. Therefore, we can remove the call toSock()and dispatch the callback directly to socket the thread avoiding the data race.