From: Alexander Turenko <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org> To: Igor Munkin <imun@tarantool.org> Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 2/3] merger: clean fiber-local Lua stack after next() Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 06:08:51 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200717030851.r2zlxwgbd4nnzcjq@tkn_work_nb> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20200716220720.GB18920@tarantool.org> > > > > @@ -206,14 +216,10 @@ luaT_temp_luastate(int *coro_ref) > > > > * It is the other half of `luaT_temp_luastate()`. > > > > */ > > > > static void > > > > -luaT_release_temp_luastate(int coro_ref) > > > > +luaT_release_temp_luastate(struct lua_State *L, int coro_ref, int top) > > > > { > > > > - /* > > > > - * FIXME: The reusable fiber-local Lua state is not > > > > - * unreferenced here (coro_ref == LUA_REFNIL), but > > > > - * it must be truncated to its past top to prevent > > > > - * stack overflow. > > > > - */ > > > > + if (top >= 0) > > > > + lua_settop(L, top); > > > > luaL_unref(tarantool_L, LUA_REGISTRYINDEX, coro_ref); > > > > > > Minor: You can just either restore top value for fiber-local Lua state > > > or unreference Lua coroutine without restoring a pointer to its stack > > > top slot. As a result you need to preserve the top value only for the > > > first case (i.e. when the coro_ref is LUA_NOREF) and ignore the value > > > for all other cases. > > > > Are you propose the following? > > > > | if (top >= 0) > > | lua_settop(L, top); > > | else > > | luaL_unref(tarantool_L, LUA_REGISTRYINDEX, coro_ref); > > Kinda, but with <coro_ref> in condition: > | if (coro_ref == LUA_NOREF) > | lua_settop(L, top); > | else > | luaL_unref(tarantool_L, LUA_REGISTRYINDEX, coro_ref); > > Feel free to ignore this comment if it doesn't looks logical to you. To be honest, I would prefer to keep the current way: luaT_temp_luastate() fills <top> and <coro_ref> and they separately control whether lua_settop() and luaL_unref() will be called / will have an effect in luaT_release_temp_luastate(). It is quite straightforward. But I understand that when lua_settop() has the check, but luaL_unref() has no, it looks a bit lopsided and it is quite natural to want to make it visually balanced. > > Vlad even proposed to drop `top >= 0`, which works in fact, but Lua > > Reference Manual does not guarantee it (it was discussed within this > > mailing thread). > > I see Reference Manual allows any integer number to be passed as <idx> > but I agree that behaviour for negative values are not clear from it. > JFYI, LuaJIT works the same way here vanilla Lua 5.1 does. So I'm much > closer to Vlad's opinion here, but doesn't insist on such <lua_settop> > usage, since it might not be clear from Manual. I'm quite sure we just have no such guarantee. I disagree with the point that it is guaranteed, but in some unclear way. No. I performed an attempt to find what exactly guarantees this behaviour and found nothing. I described it in [1]. Since it unlikely will be changed, we can remove the check and leave a comment to describe the behaviour we lean on. But the check just shorter and cleaner, I don't see a reason to replace it with the comment. [1]: https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/2020-June/017750.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-17 3:09 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-06-17 21:06 [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 0/3] Merger's NULL defererence Alexander Turenko 2020-06-17 21:06 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 1/3] merger: fix NULL dereference when called via iproto Alexander Turenko 2020-06-18 22:48 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy 2020-06-19 8:50 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-06-19 23:32 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy 2020-06-21 18:28 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-07-01 20:36 ` Igor Munkin 2020-07-16 20:10 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-07-16 21:42 ` Igor Munkin 2020-07-16 22:44 ` Igor Munkin 2020-07-17 3:08 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-06-17 21:06 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 2/3] merger: clean fiber-local Lua stack after next() Alexander Turenko 2020-06-19 8:50 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-07-01 20:36 ` Igor Munkin 2020-07-16 20:11 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-07-16 22:07 ` Igor Munkin 2020-07-17 3:08 ` Alexander Turenko [this message] 2020-06-17 21:06 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 3/3] lua: expose temporary Lua state for iproto calls Alexander Turenko 2020-07-01 20:37 ` Igor Munkin 2020-07-16 20:11 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-07-16 22:33 ` Igor Munkin 2020-07-17 3:09 ` Alexander Turenko 2020-06-22 20:38 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 0/3] Merger's NULL defererence Vladislav Shpilevoy 2020-07-17 11:28 ` Alexander Turenko
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20200717030851.r2zlxwgbd4nnzcjq@tkn_work_nb \ --to=alexander.turenko@tarantool.org \ --cc=imun@tarantool.org \ --cc=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \ --cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 2/3] merger: clean fiber-local Lua stack after next()' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox