Don't assume that c-ares won't retry failed writes in grpc_core::GrpcPolledFdWindows::SendVUDP#25726
Merged
apolcyn merged 1 commit intogrpc:masterfrom Mar 16, 2021
Merged
Conversation
markdroth
approved these changes
Mar 16, 2021
Contributor
Author
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Per conversation in #22555
cc @okravets
Looking at the trace provided in #22555 (comment), they interesting part is what happens to
c-ares socket: 868. Filtering for that socket in the logs:The main thing to note is that the c-ares library attempted a write on this UDP socket and got an "Invalid argument" error on that attempt (which can apparently happen on network issues). Then, later, the c-ares library attempted to write on the same socket, again.
The c-ares windows UDP socket handler currently assumes that if a UDP socket returns an error, that the c-ares library won't try to re-send data on that socket. However, looking closely at this codepath, c-ares won't necessarily do that. Thus, we are vulnerable to hitting the assertion error in here.
So the patch listed in #22555 (comment) looks like the right fix.