Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Adding note on SB undefined behavior with SB_PEND_FOREVER and CFE_SB_DeletePipe() #1802

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Adding note on SB undefined behavior with SB_PEND_FOREVER and CFE_SB_DeletePipe() #1802

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

jbohren-hbr
Copy link
Contributor

Describe the contribution
This adds affirmative documentation regarding the discussion in #1777 and #1799

Testing performed
Documentation only.

Expected behavior changes
Documentation only.

System(s) tested on

  • None

Additional context
See discussion in #1777

Third party code
No third party code included.

Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Jonathan Bohren, Honeybee Robotics

@astrogeco astrogeco added the docs This change only affects documentation. label Aug 11, 2021
@astrogeco astrogeco requested a review from skliper August 11, 2021 18:19
@skliper skliper requested a review from jphickey August 11, 2021 18:45
@astrogeco
Copy link
Contributor

CCB:2021-08-18

  • Postpone until Draco
  • App developers shouldn't call "pend forever" and ensure a graceful shutdown
  • It is hard to handle this in a generic sense
  • Try to avoid managing resources from multiple places
  • Make a note on all Delete APIs of what happens when calling them when a resource is shared
  • Might be able to handle it by sending a message to all subscribers -> this will probably break things, devil is in the details...
  • Unix signals "got it right"

@astrogeco astrogeco added this to the cFS-Draco milestone Aug 18, 2021
@skliper
Copy link
Contributor

skliper commented Aug 18, 2021

Short story - although these statements are true (and kudos for using a functional test to show the behavior!!), there's hesitation in quickly merging such information when we'd prefer to take the time to document/detail supported patterns and things to avoid when sharing resources across tasks from a more holistic perspective. Definitely appreciate the contribution and we plan to circle back.

@jbohren-hbr
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sounds good. Thanks for the updates @skliper @astrogeco.

@skliper skliper removed this from the Draco milestone Mar 18, 2022
@dzbaker dzbaker added the CCB:Ignore Pull Request can be ignored. Will be re-examined at by next CCB. label Sep 8, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@skliper skliper Awaiting requested review from skliper

@jphickey jphickey Awaiting requested review from jphickey

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
CCB:Ignore Pull Request can be ignored. Will be re-examined at by next CCB. docs This change only affects documentation.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@jbohren-hbr @astrogeco @skliper @dzbaker