Implement a basic event loop without libuv#10054
Conversation
|
Looks great. Can you replace more of the event loops in My only reservation is that this exposes a condition variable via |
The PausibleIdleCallback must have some handle into the event loop, and because struct destructors are run in order of top-to-bottom in order of fields, this meant that the event loop was getting destroyed before the idle callback was getting destroyed. I can't confirm that this fixes a problem in how we use libuv, but it does semantically fix a problem for usage with other event loops.
This is a peculiar function to require event loops to implement, and it's only used in one spot during tests right now. Instead, a possibly more robust apis for timers should be used rather than requiring all event loops to implement a curious-looking function.
|
I replaced This would probably get alleviated if we start implementing "graceful fallback" onto native thread-blocking implementations, but that can probably happen later. r? @brson on this strategy (just to make sure I'm sane) |
It's not guaranteed that there will always be an event loop to run, and this implementation will serve as an incredibly basic one which does not provide any I/O, but allows the scheduler to still run. cc rust-lang#9128
This is more progress towards #9128 and all its related tree of issues. This implements a new `BasicLoop` on top of pthreads synchronization primitives (wrapped in `LittleLock`). This also removes the wonky `callback_ms` function from the interface of the event loop. After #9901 is taking forever to land, I'm going to try to do all this runtime work in much smaller chunks than before. Right now this will not work unless #9901 lands first, but I'm close to landing it (hopefully), and I wanted to go ahead and get this reviewed before throwing it at bors later on down the road. This "pausible idle callback" is also a bit of a weird idea, but it wasn't as difficult to implement as callback_ms so I'm more semi-ok with it.
3 participants
This is more progress towards #9128 and all its related tree of issues. This implements a new
BasicLoopon top of pthreads synchronization primitives (wrapped inLittleLock). This also removes the wonkycallback_msfunction from the interface of the event loop.After #9901 is taking forever to land, I'm going to try to do all this runtime work in much smaller chunks than before. Right now this will not work unless #9901 lands first, but I'm close to landing it (hopefully), and I wanted to go ahead and get this reviewed before throwing it at bors later on down the road.
This "pausible idle callback" is also a bit of a weird idea, but it wasn't as difficult to implement as callback_ms so I'm more semi-ok with it.