Repository navigation
Merged
Conversation
…mutex/queue in finalizers
Contributor
|
Could you have reproduced it ? |
Member
Author
|
No, I do not have a reproducer. I will have to look up the people who had the original problem and ask them to try it. |
|
I can confirm this patch avoids the segfault I was seeing. I was using ruby version: Thank you so much @pitr-ch ! Example seg fault without this patch. With the patch there is no seg fault Details |
donoghuc
added a commit
to donoghuc/ace
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 25, 2020
This commit addresses some bit rot that has happened in ace. 1. The concurrent-ruby 1.1.6 release triggers a seg fault in MRI ruby 2.5. There is a PR to concurrent ruby ruby-concurrency/concurrent-ruby#856 which I have verified fixes the seg fault but has not been merged/released. For now I pinned to 1.1.5 which does not have the issue. 2. The puppet 6.14.0 release included some changes that were incompatable with ace. First is the code loading for subclassing `Puppet::Configurer`. This was addressed in `ace` by simply loading all of puppet before `puppet/configurer`. The second issue is that previously puppet's logic for figuring out which server to connect to (based on SRV settings, server_list or Puppet[:ca_server] vs Puppet[:server} was spread out all over the place. Puppet switched to using a new http client in 6.14.0 So the logic for resolving which host to connect to is based on a set of resolvers. The change in behavior is that previous ace was pushing `:server` onto the context and puppet would sometimes look that value up when making a connection: https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/blob/master/lib/puppet/util/connection.rb#L31 3. Rake was bumped due to some CVE that did not really affect our project.
Member
Author
|
@donoghuc thanks for the confirmation! |
|
Thank you for this patch! I believe I'm encountering this segfault as well. Is there a timeline for merging this PR and releasing? |
@pitr-ch is there anything I can do or testing that I can do to help get this merged? If not, does anyone have a smallish workaround while we wait for this patch to land? Thanks for your time and energy spent on this project! |
|
@chrisseaton @jdantonio @sh286 thoughts? |
Member
|
It's @pitr-ch's code - hopefully he'll take a look after this ping or maybe if he's blocked by work he can let me know what needs doing on it. |
I've been unable to get a response from @pitr-ch at all on this. (I hope they are ok) Is there anything else you can do to help me out here @chrisseaton ? |
Member
|
I'll try to reach him and if he can't I'll get back to you and do something. |
Member
Author
|
Sorry for letting you wait. I've been busy and had to put this aside. Merging. |
|
@pitr-ch Thanks so much! you rock |
|
No worries! Just glad to see this get merged. I'm glad to see you are alright and concurrent-ruby still has active maintainers 👍 |
|
Awesome, thank you! |
|
@pitr-ch Is there a release schedule posted somewhere or do you have any idea when we cut a new release? Let me know if there's any testing or help I can contribute. |
Member
Author
|
No schedule, I should be able to find some time to do it this week. |
Member
Author
|
Released 🎉 |
gimmyxd
added a commit
to gimmyxd/ace
that referenced
this pull request
May 17, 2021
concurrent-ruby was locked to 1.1.5 in puppetlabs#69 due to an issue in 1.1.6. A fix for that was released on concurrent-ruby-1.1.7: ruby-concurrency/concurrent-ruby#856 Recently, in puppet-runtime, concurrent-ruby was bumped to 1.1.8 https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet-runtime/pull/446/files#diff-6393a204a090900f17b88f58f21f2b5c355271b5e8df85328a80accbc2c503e0R2 making ruby pe-ace-server unable to start: ``` -- Unit pe-ace-server.service has begun starting up. May 17 08:15:28 main-wisdom puma[15711]: /opt/puppetlabs/puppet/lib/ruby/2.5.0/rubygems/dependency.rb:312:in `to_specs’: Could not find ‘concurrent-ruby’ (= 1.1.5) - did find: [concurrent-ruby-1.1.8] (Gem::MissingSpecVersionError) ``` This commit removes the lock of concurrent-ruby as the upstream issue was fixed and release.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
fix #849
related to #808