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

Fixed bug that lead to infinite wait for dns futures #10529

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Logioniz
Copy link

@Logioniz Logioniz commented Mar 8, 2025

What do these changes do?

Fixed bug that lead to infinite wait for dns futures when exception occured in trace.send_dns_cache_miss call.

Are there changes in behavior for the user?

No

Is it a substantial burden for the maintainers to support this?

No

Related issue number

No issue.

Checklist

  • I think the code is well written
  • Unit tests for the changes exist
  • Documentation reflects the changes
  • If you provide code modification, please add yourself to CONTRIBUTORS.txt
    • The format is <Name> <Surname>.
    • Please keep alphabetical order, the file is sorted by names.
  • Add a new news fragment into the CHANGES/ folder
    • name it <issue_or_pr_num>.<type>.rst (e.g. 588.bugfix.rst)
    • if you don't have an issue number, change it to the pull request
      number after creating the PR
      • .bugfix: A bug fix for something the maintainers deemed an
        improper undesired behavior that got corrected to match
        pre-agreed expectations.
      • .feature: A new behavior, public APIs. That sort of stuff.
      • .deprecation: A declaration of future API removals and breaking
        changes in behavior.
      • .breaking: When something public is removed in a breaking way.
        Could be deprecated in an earlier release.
      • .doc: Notable updates to the documentation structure or build
        process.
      • .packaging: Notes for downstreams about unobvious side effects
        and tooling. Changes in the test invocation considerations and
        runtime assumptions.
      • .contrib: Stuff that affects the contributor experience. e.g.
        Running tests, building the docs, setting up the development
        environment.
      • .misc: Changes that are hard to assign to any of the above
        categories.
    • Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation,
      for example:
      Fixed issue with non-ascii contents in doctest text files
      -- by :user:`contributor-gh-handle`.

@Logioniz Logioniz requested a review from asvetlov as a code owner March 8, 2025 20:18
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Mar 8, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #10529 will not alter performance

Comparing Logioniz:master (fa7c10c) with master (6d205da)

Summary

✅ 46 untouched benchmarks

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 8, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 98.69%. Comparing base (6d205da) to head (fa7c10c).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #10529      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   98.70%   98.69%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         122      122              
  Lines       37230    37253      +23     
  Branches     2064     2065       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        36748    36768      +20     
- Misses        335      338       +3     
  Partials      147      147              
Flag Coverage Δ
CI-GHA 98.57% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
OS-Linux 98.24% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
OS-Windows 96.18% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
OS-macOS 97.35% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.10.11 97.27% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
Py-3.10.16 97.81% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
Py-3.11.11 97.89% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.11.9 97.35% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
Py-3.12.8 ?
Py-3.12.9 98.35% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
Py-3.13.1 97.14% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
Py-3.13.2 98.31% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
Py-3.9.13 97.15% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.9.21 97.68% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
Py-pypy7.3.16 85.51% <100.00%> (-1.79%) ⬇️
VM-macos 97.35% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
VM-ubuntu 98.24% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
VM-windows 96.18% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@bdraco bdraco added backport-3.11 Trigger automatic backporting to the 3.11 release branch by Patchback robot backport-3.12 Trigger automatic backporting to the 3.12 release branch by Patchback robot labels Mar 8, 2025
@Logioniz Logioniz requested a review from webknjaz as a code owner March 8, 2025 20:35
@psf-chronographer psf-chronographer bot added the bot:chronographer:provided There is a change note present in this PR label Mar 8, 2025
@Logioniz
Copy link
Author

Logioniz commented Mar 8, 2025

I'm not sure, but it looks like the same problem (endless waiting for dns queries) could occur if an exception is thrown in this part of the code:

coro = self._resolve_host_with_throttle(key, host, port, futures, traces)
loop = asyncio.get_running_loop()
if sys.version_info >= (3, 12):
# Optimization for Python 3.12, try to send immediately
resolved_host_task = asyncio.Task(coro, loop=loop, eager_start=True)
else:
resolved_host_task = loop.create_task(coro)
if not resolved_host_task.done():
self._resolve_host_tasks.add(resolved_host_task)
resolved_host_task.add_done_callback(self._resolve_host_tasks.discard)

I want to say that asyncio.get_running_loop, asyncio.Task, loop.create_task, asyncio.shield may throw an exception that leads to the same behavior. What do you think?

@bdraco
Copy link
Member

bdraco commented Mar 8, 2025

I'm not sure, but it looks like the same problem (endless waiting for dns queries) could occur if an exception is thrown in this part of the code:

coro = self._resolve_host_with_throttle(key, host, port, futures, traces)
loop = asyncio.get_running_loop()
if sys.version_info >= (3, 12):
# Optimization for Python 3.12, try to send immediately
resolved_host_task = asyncio.Task(coro, loop=loop, eager_start=True)
else:
resolved_host_task = loop.create_task(coro)
if not resolved_host_task.done():
self._resolve_host_tasks.add(resolved_host_task)
resolved_host_task.add_done_callback(self._resolve_host_tasks.discard)

I want to say that asyncio.get_running_loop, asyncio.Task, loop.create_task, asyncio.shield may throw an exception that leads to the same behavior. What do you think?

I think the only one that would be worth worrying about is awaiting resolved_host_task. If the others are throwing an exception, the system is already likely in an unrecoverable state.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport-3.11 Trigger automatic backporting to the 3.11 release branch by Patchback robot backport-3.12 Trigger automatic backporting to the 3.12 release branch by Patchback robot bot:chronographer:provided There is a change note present in this PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants