-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 897
fix(pty): close output writer before reader on Windows to unblock close #8299
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
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5770111
fix(pty): consume final console frame on Windows to unblock close
mafredri c3f472b
test
mafredri 2bd817d
debug
mafredri 53fb4c8
improve ptytest logs
mafredri 068ed51
cleanup comment
mafredri 3762cb8
fix wrong assumptions
mafredri 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Review: I contemplated ignoring ret/err here entirely, however, in my testing it seems this function usually returns
S_FALSE
(1). Since I can't find documentation for this behavior, we allowS_OK
too. Given positive error values, limiting this to negative doesn't make sense to me: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/seccrypto/common-hresult-valuesThere 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.
Values like
0x80004001
are negative when interpreted as a signed 32 bit integer because they are encoded in two's complimentThere 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.
S_FALSE is a "success" code, so I think it's still fine to check ret<0 for in general.
In this specific case, Windows docs say that there is no return value, so my guess is that the Windows syscall libraries, or perhaps the Windows kernel itself is writing S_FALSE for this procedure to indicate that it's not an explicit "OK" because the call has no return value.
We could just drop the whole error handling block here and cite the docs that say this procedure doesn't return any values.
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.
True, however the return value from
Call
is an uintptr and thisret
wasn't being cast to 32-bit. As such theret < 0
was nonsensical. I don't know enough about Windows syscall internals to know if we can always cast it, that would assume a syscall always returns HRESULT (maybe it does).Sounds plausible, this value is at least not coming from Go and Windows does define success as a positive 32-bit integer.
I would still like to keep it, just in case. Unless we can confirm that this syscall can't fail in some way or form.
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.
Changed this to
int32(ret) < 0
now, to be more generic and self-documenting via a newfunc winerrorFailed(r1 uintptr) bool
function.