Are FFI calls interruptible?
Bas van Dijk
v.dijk.bas at gmail.com
Sun Apr 24 22:10:46 CEST 2011
On 24 April 2011 18:58, Edward Z. Yang <ezyang at mit.edu> wrote:
> Well, that will result in a race where, if the foreign call gets interrupted,
> the asynchronous exception will get queued up and fire immediately once
> the FFI call completes,
Well the whole block of code is under a mask_ so if FFI calls are not
interruptible the queued up exceptions should not be fired.
I did a quick test that throwed 1000 exceptions to a thread executing
that piece of code but with the uninterruptibleMask_ only around the
'acquire lock'. As expected only the first one got through.
> thus enabling libusb_cancel_transfer to be called
> but not acquire lock to be called. Is that the desired semantics?
No, the desired semantics are that after calling the asynchronous
libusb_cancel_transfer, we must wait for the transfer to terminate.
Although it's correct to put the uninterruptibleMask_ only around the
'acquire lock' I think I leave it as it is. If for some reason the
interruptibility of FFI calls changes in the future I will be safe.
Better be safe than sorry.
Edward, thanks for your insights.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users