-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 76
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
Potential issue in UDP ping-pong benchmark #38
Comments
Merged
mitchellh
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 21, 2023
# Description This PR brings support for Windows using the [I/O Completion Port](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/fileio/i-o-completion-ports). Closes #10 # Notes for reviewers Unfortunately, this is a pretty beefy PR. I tried to clean the git history so that it's kind of reviewable commit by commit though. My approach was similar to what @mitchellh suggested me: first the backend core, then the watchers building on top of it. I also added support for Windows tests in GH Actions as he told me he didn't have access to a Windows machine. Please note that this work is far from perfect, it was my first time playing with IOCP so expect some weirdness/mistakes. ## Known pain-points/limitations **Timers** Timings rely on `GetQueuedCompletionStatusEx` timeout parameter. I read multiple times that timings on Windows were, well, slightly inaccurate (plot twist: that's a euphemism). I'm not confident enough to deep dive into this rabbit hole, so if somebody has more knowledge on that, feel free to improve my implementation. **Async** I have the feeling that there is a better way to implement the `Async` watchers compared to what I did. I couldn't come up with a better way than inspiring myself from the `WASI` backend. The part I struggled the most with was the fact that `Async` can be notified before being linked to a `Loop`. This requires to store the fact that it's notified inside the `Async` struct, but then it opens up a lot of other questions and failed to find a satisfying solution taking care of all of them. I'll try to come back to it with a fresh mind but I'm open to suggestions in the meantime 😁 **Completion port `HANDLE` registering** In order to be able to wait for asynchronous I/O, `HANDLE` needs to be linked to a Completion Port. However, you can only register it once otherwise, the linking call fails. I first tried to let the user handle that by giving the possibility to link a handle to a `Loop`, but that ended up being unreliable and cumbersome when implementing Watchers. My final decision was to ignore the failure and suppose that it always works. Win32 documentation is not what we could call exhaustive, so I don't if it's possible for an association to fail on the first call to `CreateIoCompletionPort` with a newly created `HANDLE`. Worst scenario is that it fails silently and asynchronous wait on this `HANDLE` never completes. If anyone has an idea as to how we could properly solve that, don't hesitate 😁 **UDP Benchmark tweaks** This is described in #38 **Process support** I didn't implement support for `Process` watchers yet. I feel like it's not required to merge this (already big) PR. I'll see if adding support is possible in the future.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
What's the issue
In the
ping-udp1.zig
benchmark, there is a potential issue that can arise depending on the order of execution ofread
/write
callbacks.If everything is fine, the
write
callback will run first, thus setting the associatedCompletion
to a.dead
state and ready to be used again.However, if the
read
callback runs first, here is what happens:read
callback, we call thePinger.write(...)
method and enqueue awrite
operation using thePinger.c_write
field. This has the effect to put the completion in the list of completion to submit on the nexttick
write
completion is executed, we set the state to theCompletion
to.dead
c_write
completion is discarded because its state is set to.dead
read
operation is waiting for awrite
operation that will never happenContext
I noticed that while working on the IOCP backend. Somehow, the
read
completion was handled before thewrite
operation and it lead to the described behavior.Potential solutions
Solution 1 - Simple but kind of misses the point of the bench
Instead of queuing the
read
operation at the same time as thewrite
operation, we can wait for thewrite
to be completed. However, this introduce artificial latency and despite making the behavior correct, it doesn't really bench anything as operation are serialized.Solution 2
Another approach would be to wait for both callbacks to have been executed before enqueuing new operations. That would solve the issue of the
c_write
completion to be reused before its callback has been called.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: