[Core] Remove asyncio.ensure_future call in run_async_func_in_event_loop - #32932
Merged
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Jiajun Yao <jeromeyjj@gmail.com>
jjyao
commented
Mar 1, 2023
| coroutine = func(*args, **kwargs) | ||
| if threading.get_ident() == async_thread.ident: | ||
| future = asyncio.ensure_future(coroutine, eventloop) | ||
| future = asyncio.ensure_future(coroutine, loop=eventloop) |
Contributor
Author
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm i think we should unify the code path here, especially run_coroutine_threadsafe can perform the check for us.
I believe this is triggered when the serde code gets called while we are in async thread, and the serde functions themselves involves calling async funcs. this is probably due to the fact during await object_ref the core worker as of 3 years ago will recursively call into this function so we need to handle this case.
nevertheless, this is definitely legacy code and safe to unify
rkooo567
approved these changes
Mar 1, 2023
rkooo567
left a comment
rkooo567
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's surprising this wasn't caught from testing? Can you add proper unit tests?
Contributor
Author
Unfortunately I was not able to get a reproduce. After talking to Simon, we think the code can be safely deleted. |
jjyao
changed the title
ProjectsByJackHe
pushed a commit
to ProjectsByJackHe/ray
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2023
…oop(ray-project#32932) asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe can work regardless whether the calling thread is the same as the event loop thread or not. The original asyncio.ensure_future call is also wrong: asyncio.ensure_future has the signature asyncio.ensure_future(obj, *, loop=None) so loop has to be provided as a keyword argument instead of positional argument. Signed-off-by: Jiajun Yao <jeromeyjj@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jack He <jackhe2345@gmail.com>
edoakes
pushed a commit
to edoakes/ray
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2023
…oop(ray-project#32932) asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe can work regardless whether the calling thread is the same as the event loop thread or not. The original asyncio.ensure_future call is also wrong: asyncio.ensure_future has the signature asyncio.ensure_future(obj, *, loop=None) so loop has to be provided as a keyword argument instead of positional argument. Signed-off-by: Jiajun Yao <jeromeyjj@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Edward Oakes <ed.nmi.oakes@gmail.com>
peytondmurray
pushed a commit
to peytondmurray/ray
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2023
…oop(ray-project#32932) asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe can work regardless whether the calling thread is the same as the event loop thread or not. The original asyncio.ensure_future call is also wrong: asyncio.ensure_future has the signature asyncio.ensure_future(obj, *, loop=None) so loop has to be provided as a keyword argument instead of positional argument. Signed-off-by: Jiajun Yao <jeromeyjj@gmail.com>
elliottower
pushed a commit
to elliottower/ray
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 22, 2023
…oop(ray-project#32932) asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe can work regardless whether the calling thread is the same as the event loop thread or not. The original asyncio.ensure_future call is also wrong: asyncio.ensure_future has the signature asyncio.ensure_future(obj, *, loop=None) so loop has to be provided as a keyword argument instead of positional argument. Signed-off-by: Jiajun Yao <jeromeyjj@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: elliottower <elliot@elliottower.com>
ProjectsByJackHe
pushed a commit
to ProjectsByJackHe/ray
that referenced
this pull request
May 4, 2023
…oop(ray-project#32932) asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe can work regardless whether the calling thread is the same as the event loop thread or not. The original asyncio.ensure_future call is also wrong: asyncio.ensure_future has the signature asyncio.ensure_future(obj, *, loop=None) so loop has to be provided as a keyword argument instead of positional argument. Signed-off-by: Jiajun Yao <jeromeyjj@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jack He <jackhe2345@gmail.com>
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
4 participants
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.
Why are these changes needed?
asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe can work regardless whether the calling thread is the same as the event loop thread or not.
The original asyncio.ensure_future call is also wrong: asyncio.ensure_future has the signature
asyncio.ensure_future(obj, *, loop=None)so loop has to be provided as a keyward argument instead of positional argument.I think this is the cause of https://discuss.ray.io/t/typeerror-ensure-future-takes-1-positional-argument-but-2-were-given/9453
Related issue number
Checks
git commit -s) in this PR.scripts/format.shto lint the changes in this PR.