-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
fix: abandon the work applier reconciliation loop when the main context exits #343
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
Merged
michaelawyu
merged 3 commits into
kubefleet-dev:main
from
michaelawyu:fix/work-applier-abandon-when-context-exits
Nov 27, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not do this check in framework.go and preprocess.go?
If this is applicable everywhere, maybe do this check and return error from
func (p *parallelizer) ParallelizeUntil(ctx context.Context, pieces int, doWork workqueue.DoWorkPieceFunc, operation string)
whenever ctx is cancelled?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1, ParallelizeUtil is an interface we own. We can probably return error from there.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The reason that I raised this originally is "can we make it easier for the next person using ParallelizeUntil so that they won't forget to check for context cancellation if we can encapsulate the handling inside the parallelizer package." But it seems that there are some nuances so okay with this approach.
For example, in framework.go we are already handling the context cancellation error separately
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi Wei and Wantong! Yeah, actually that was my first attempt as well. The concern I had was that, there are cases where we run
ParallelizeUntilin its own child context (primarily for the reason that the child context can be cancelled on its own to terminate the parallelization promptly); and if we do the checking with our wrapper, e.g.,two possibilities exist:
a) the child context is cancelled willingly by us, and the method returns an error;
b) the parent context gets cancelled by factors outside our control, which in turn cancels the child context, and we also receive an error
The complication is that, we couldn't really tell between the two possibilities by looking at the error, so we still need to inspect the parent context at the caller level to find out why things fail, which kind of defeats the purpose of putting the logic inside the wrapper. This is why in this PR the check is done at the caller level instead at the moment. If there's any concern or things that I've missed, please let me know 🙏