[Concurrency] Task names #77609
[Concurrency] Task names #77609
Conversation
ktoso
requested review from
a team,
jckarter,
rjmccall,
hborla,
slavapestov,
xedin and
DougGregor
as code owners
ktoso
force-pushed
the
wip-task-names
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8538eef to
39038d8
Compare
ktoso
force-pushed
the
wip-task-names
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b74c08b to
b5be7ee
Compare
ktoso
force-pushed
the
wip-task-names
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ec11380 to
55c5ae6
Compare
| void *allocation = _swift_task_alloc_specific( | ||
| this, sizeof(class TaskNameStatusRecord)); | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: Copy the string maybe into the same allocation at an offset or retain the swift string? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Retaining the Swift string makes sense to me. It avoids an extra copy when the string is dynamic, and avoids any copies when it's constant. I'm not sure how inconvenient it would be to manipulate a String from the C++ side of things.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, so sadly it's quite painful to make this work... we have to manually inspect flags in the String's flags and then copy or not copy accordingly... I'll try to prepare our ABI so we COULD do this but I will probably not do so in the first impl.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is our LTO good enough to have the stdlib expose some minimal calls for us to use here, and have it optimize to something reasonable? (Or maybe this isn't performance sensitive enough for that to matter anyway?) We'd really want to reuse the existing String code and treat it as an opaque value here.
ktoso
force-pushed
the
wip-task-names
branch
from
dd75b00 to
b3f2b6d
Compare
ktoso
force-pushed
the
wip-task-names
branch
from
d22b0b7 to
ef9e5f3
Compare
ktoso
requested review from
etcwilde,
compnerd,
edymtt and
justice-adams-apple
as code owners
| #endif | ||
| // NOTE: We had to move sources touching TaskGroup addTask APIs into TaskGroup+addTask.swift.gyb | ||
| // due to the build having trouble with using the generated source in the same module | ||
| // rdar://145171772 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Build problem nr 1, I can't figure out how to get the gyb generated file included in the module 🤔
|
|
||
| import Swift | ||
|
|
||
| // ==== addTask / addTaskUnlessCancelled --------------------------------------- |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This gyb replaces a few thousand lines (and like 20 definitions) of addTask implementations. We still have ad hoc ones though, and I can't get the gyb result to be included in the build so there's workarounds here still
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
ktoso
force-pushed
the
wip-task-names
branch
from
f2b080a to
efbbc2c
Compare
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
|
The build isn't still right, we still need the |
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
|
resolves rdar://88918762 |
This reverts commit 4ab5d26.
This reverts commit 4ab5d26.
swiftlang#79562) This reverts commit 09003d6.
swiftlang#79562) This reverts commit 09003d6.
swiftlang#79562) This reverts commit 09003d6.
Work in progress on adding names to tasks.
Pending SE proposal.