-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
Make rekillable consistent with unkillable #8581
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
Conversation
@bblum here it is 😃 |
@bblum I added a small test but I'm not 100% that's what is needed. I'll add more if so. I'd appreciate if you could elaborate more on the various cases you think worth testing. (I'm pretty new to rust). Thanks a lot! |
The test you added looks good but there should also be a test for the advertised behaviour, namely, that a task can get killed inside a rekillable block. Something like this:
You also have not added any code to the runtime that will actually make the task fail, which you will need to do if you want the tests to pass. |
This needs a rebase (it no longer merges cleanly). |
Will do! I'm out and I'll be back tomorrow!!! |
As for now, rekillable is an unsafe function, instead, it should behave just like unkillable by encapsulating unsafe code within an unsafe block. This patch does that and removes unsafe blocks that were encapsulating rekillable calls throughout rust's libs. Fixes rust-lang#8232
rebased |
As for now, rekillable is an unsafe function, instead, it should behave just like unkillable by encapsulating unsafe code within an unsafe block. This patch does that and removes unsafe blocks that were encapsulating rekillable calls throughout rust's libs. Fixes #8232
As for now, rekillable is an unsafe function, instead, it should behave
just like unkillable by encapsulating unsafe code within an unsafe
block.
This patch does that and removes unsafe blocks that were encapsulating
rekillable calls throughout rust's libs.
Fixes #8232