| Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is this an overkill? I don't know.
The thing is, correctly intercepting SIGTERM (also SIGINT, etc.) is
incredibly tricky. For example, before this commit, my I/O loops in
server.c and worker.c were inherently racy.
This was immediately obvious if you tried to run the tests. The tests
(especially the Valgrind flavour) would run a worker, wait until it
prints a "Waiting for a new command" line, and try to kill it using
SIGTERM. The problem is, the global_stop_flag check could have already
been executed by the worker, and it would hang forever in recv().
The solution seems to be to use signalfd and select()/poll(). I've never
used either before, but it seems to work well enough - at least the very
same tests pass and don't hang now.
|
|
|
|
OK, this is a major rework.
* tcp_server: connection threads are not detached anymore, the caller has
to clean them up. This was done so that the server can clean up the
threads cleanly.
* run_queue: simple refactoring, run_queue_entry is called just run now.
* server: worker threads are now killed when a run is assigned to a
worker.
* worker: the connection to server is no longer persistent. A worker
sends "new-worker", waits for a task, closes the connection, and when
it's done, sends the "complete" message and waits for a new task.
This is supposed to improve resilience, since the worker-server
connections don't have to be maintained while the worker is doing a CI
run.
|
|
Also, some minor refactoring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Turns out, I don't really need to install it for the tests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previously, I had a stupid system where I would create a thread after
every accept(), and put worker descriptors in a queue. A special
"scheduler" thread would then pick them out, and give out jobs to
complete.
The problem was, of course, I couldn't conveniently poll job status from
workers. I thought about using poll(), but that turned out to be a
horribly complicated API. How do I deal with partial reads, for example?
I don't honestly know.
Then it hit me that I could just use the threads that handle accept()ed
connections as "worker threads", which would synchronously schedule jobs
and wait for them to complete. This solves every problem and removes the
need for a lot of inter-thread synchronization magic. It even works now,
holy crap! You can launch and terminate workers at will, and they will
pick up new jobs automatically.
As a side not, msg_recv_and_handle turned out to be too limiting and
complicated for me, so I got rid of that, and do normal
msg_recv/msg_send calls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, maybe "graceful" is a strong word, but now you _can_ do
./server &
./worker &
./client ci_run URL REV && kill "$( pidof worker )"
and the worker will wait for the CI run to complete.
|
|
This adds a basic "worker" program.
You can now do something like
./server &
./worker &
./client ci_run URL REV
and the server should pass a message to worker, after which it should
clone the repository at URL, checkout REV, and try to run the CI script.
It's extremely unfinished: I need to sort out the graceful shutdown, how
the server manages workers, etc.
|
|
This is a dumb warning.
|
|
First, rename all API functions so that they start with net_.
Second, abstract the basic TCP server functionality into tcp_server.c.
This includes reworking net_accept so that it's a simple blocking
operation, and putting the callback stuff to tcp_server.c. Also, the
server now uses detached threads instead of fork(), since I want
connection handlers to share memory.
|
|
This I feel better conveys the meaning.
|
|
A basic client-server app, the client sends commands as an array of
strings. Hopefully I didn't mess up, and hopefully it'll be useful.
|
