[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-d
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function |
Date: |
Mon, 08 Apr 2019 20:13:50 +0300 |
> Cc: 34763@debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 19:42:04 +0300
>
> > After installing the patch, I think we should indeed try adding code
> > to kill the process. That's why I asked you to try that manually
> > first: to see if doing that will have some positive effect.
>
> OK then. But if we're killing the process, should we worry about the
> sentinel and the filter?
Using delete-process would take care of that. The sentinel will run,
of course, but I see no reason to worry about that.
> url-retrieve-synchronously doesn't bother to reset them, just kills the
> process. Speaking of, shouldn't that be enough for our scenario?
I think so, yes.
> >> And what happens if the function is interrupted before
> >> url-http-debug has had a chance to be called?
> >
> > Not sure why you are bothered by that. Why would we need to handle
> > this situation differently from the others?
>
> Well, if url-http-debug is never entered, its cleanup logic will never
> be executed. Shouldn't we consider that a problem as well?
Depends on how the cleanup code will be written. It can be written
such that it works regardless where the interruption happens.
> >> Or what if it's interrupted by a different signal than 'quit'?
> >
> > That's a different issue: in general Emacs retries the calls
> > interrupted by signals internally.
>
> I mean, like, interrupted by a different kind of error. Not a signal
> that's cleanly handled in Emacs's internals.
A bug, then?
> >> Or what if it's interrupted by a symbol being thrown, set up by
> >> while-no-input?
> >
> > It shouldn't, that's what the change I proposed does, doesn't it?
>
> I mean the running code is interrupted, in general, by a symbol being
> thrown.
That'd also be a bug, IMO. We can expect bugs to behave abnormally.
> *If* I kill the running processes before doing that 10-minute wait, yes.
>
> At least that's what I meant. But, sorry to report, repeating the same
> couple of experiments again doesn't yield the same result (killing the
> processes didn't give any measurable impact compared to not killing them
> and simply waiting).
>
> So we seem to have two problems, yes.
>
> Simply waiting for a some amount of time tends to get the problem
> "unstuck", though the improvement is gradual and fairly unpredictable.
Is it related in any way with the outstanding connections being
completed/closed? What does netstat show?
> > And the process filter does read from the process, right? My
> > point was that being interruptible by C-g is implemented in the low
> > level code used by both accept-process-output and reading process
> > output that is fed to a filter.
>
> Okay. But that is referring to the code that reads the output, not
> whatever CPU-intensive loops can be inside the filter function, right?
Yes.
> And as for "bug of the code", I'm saying that there must be some code
> that can hog the CPU (the comment refers to it), and we might want to
> handle that carefully.
A simple C-g should theoretically take handle that carefully.
> I wish somebody who knows URL's code could comment on that.
Seconded.
> It probably means that seeing non-nil quit-flag is unreliable anyway,
> though, so doing cleanup or not depending on the value of that variable
> seems unwise.
Yes, this part is better left to the cleanup we do in C.
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/03
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/04/04
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/04
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/04/04
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/04
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/04/05
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/08
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/04/08
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/08
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/08
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/04/09
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/09
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/04/10
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/10
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Andreas Schwab, 2019/04/11
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/11
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/11
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/04/11
- bug#34763: 27.0.50; url-retrieve-synchronously misbehaves inside eldoc-documentation-function, Dmitry Gutov, 2019/04/11