5 ms·

This does not appear to be a concurrency bug though?

by c0balt 3mo ago

pseudony 3mo ago
“ a race condition that occurred only under specific conditions — in the hyper library”
- conradludgate 3mo ago
  Fearless concurrency has always been regarding data races. There's no fear of undefined behaviour due to a race condition. Rust has never promised to solve race conditions as a whole.
microgpt 3mo ago
Of course it's a concurrency bug. It races sending data to the kernel against the kernel sending data to the network. If the wrong one wins the bug occurs.
- inexcf 3mo ago
  Isn't that like saying there can never be a language with safe concurrency since the code could interact with C code that segfaults? I dunno this kinda reminds me of the 10/10 Rust CVE that turned out to be cmd.exe on Windows not sanitizing inputs and languages like Java just labeled it "won't fix".
  - microgpt 3mo ago
    You mean the one where Windows doesn't have argv the way Unix does, and instead just has a single string that is interpreted slightly differently by each executable? That is a language making false assertions about how the underlying platform works, causing an impedance mismatch that is impossible to fix.
    - inexcf 3mo ago
      Yeah, the one most languages (except for Rust)* decided was not a language problem and did not fix. *should clarify, Node.js, PHP, and Haskell did ship patches. Python, Ruby, Erlang, and Go opted for documentation updates; Java went "won't fix."
- tetha 3mo ago
  But it did not take 2 threads within the same application to interact in a bad way on data the system controlled to cause this problem. This reads more like an overly broad transition in a deterministic state machine. The fix was to split up a bad transition to shutdown.
  - microgpt 3mo ago
    Concurrency bugs don't have to be within a single process.
    - inexcf 3mo ago
      By that definition, every write() call that doesn't check for EAGAIN is a concurrency bug you're racing the disk controller. The term stops meaning anything.

This does not appear to be a concurrency bug though?

by c0balt 3mo ago

This does not appear to be a concurrency bug though?

pseudony 3mo ago

“ a race condition that occurred only under specific conditions — in the hyper library”

conradludgate 3mo ago
Fearless concurrency has always been regarding data races. There's no fear of undefined behaviour due to a race condition. Rust has never promised to solve race conditions as a whole.

microgpt 3mo ago

Of course it's a concurrency bug. It races sending data to the kernel against the kernel sending data to the network. If the wrong one wins the bug occurs.

inexcf 3mo ago
Isn't that like saying there can never be a language with safe concurrency since the code could interact with C code that segfaults? I dunno this kinda reminds me of the 10/10 Rust CVE that turned out to be cmd.exe on Windows not sanitizing inputs and languages like Java just labeled it "won't fix".
- microgpt 3mo ago
  You mean the one where Windows doesn't have argv the way Unix does, and instead just has a single string that is interpreted slightly differently by each executable? That is a language making false assertions about how the underlying platform works, causing an impedance mismatch that is impossible to fix.
  - inexcf 3mo ago
    Yeah, the one most languages (except for Rust)* decided was not a language problem and did not fix. *should clarify, Node.js, PHP, and Haskell did ship patches. Python, Ruby, Erlang, and Go opted for documentation updates; Java went "won't fix."
tetha 3mo ago
But it did not take 2 threads within the same application to interact in a bad way on data the system controlled to cause this problem. This reads more like an overly broad transition in a deterministic state machine. The fix was to split up a bad transition to shutdown.
- microgpt 3mo ago
  Concurrency bugs don't have to be within a single process.
  - inexcf 3mo ago
    By that definition, every write() call that doesn't check for EAGAIN is a concurrency bug you're racing the disk controller. The term stops meaning anything.