Implement a simple library for task cancellation and status management #34198
Conversation
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
Build failed |
|
Build failed |
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
Build failed |
|
Build failed |
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows |
|
Build failed |
rjmccall
force-pushed
the
task-library
branch
from
f575042 to
9d3e18f
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows platform |
|
Build failed |
|
Build failed |
rjmccall
force-pushed
the
task-library
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4429bcb to
0e71ef3
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test. |
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows platform. |
|
Build failed |
rjmccall
force-pushed
the
task-library
branch
from
0e71ef3 to
e9c31df
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test. |
rjmccall
force-pushed
the
task-library
branch
from
e9c31df to
59a34b7
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
Build failed |
rjmccall
force-pushed
the
task-library
branch
from
59a34b7 to
2a92ba8
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
Build failed |
There are things about this that I'm far from sold on. In particular, I'm concerned that in order to implement escalation correctly, we're going to have to add a status record for the fact that the task is being executed, which means we're going to have to potentially wait to acquire the status lock; overall, that means making an extra runtime function call and doing some atomics whenever we resume or suspend a task, which is an uncomfortable amount of overhead. The testing here is pretty grossly inadequate, but I wanted to lay down the groundwork here.
rjmccall
force-pushed
the
task-library
branch
from
2a92ba8 to
8ac4362
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test. |
|
Note that this includes a change that I'm landing separately as #34302. |
There are things about this that I'm far from sold on. In particular, I'm concerned that in order to implement escalation correctly, we're going to have to add a status record for the fact that the task is being executed, which means we're going
to have to potentially wait to acquire the status lock; overall, that means making an extra runtime function call and doing some
atomics whenever we resume or suspend a task, which is an uncomfortable amount of overhead.
The testing here is pretty grossly inadequate, but I wanted to lay down the groundwork.