[GitHub] [flink] carp84 commented on a change in pull request #11018: [FLINK-15905][runtime] Fix race condition between allocation and release of OpaqueMemoryResource

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

carp84 commented on a change in pull request #11018: [FLINK-15905][runtime] Fix race condition between allocation and release of OpaqueMemoryResource
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/11018#discussion_r375122419
 
 

 ##########
 File path: flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/memory/SharedResources.java
 ##########
 @@ -80,27 +81,37 @@
 		}
 	}
 
+	/**
+	 * Releases a lease (identified by the lease holder object) for the given type.
+	 * If no further leases exist, the resource is disposed.
+	 */
+	void release(String type, Object leaseHolder) throws Exception {
+		release(type, leaseHolder, (value) -> {});
+	}
+
 	/**
 	 * Releases a lease (identified by the lease holder object) for the given type.
 	 * If no further leases exist, the resource is disposed.
 	 *
-	 * @return True, if this was the last lease holder and the resource was disposed.
+	 * <p>This method takes an additional hook that is called when the resource is disposed.
 	 */
-	boolean release(String type, Object leaseHolder) throws Exception {
+	void release(String type, Object leaseHolder, Consumer<Long> releaser) throws Exception {
 		lock.lock();
 		try {
-			final LeasedResource resource = reservedResources.get(type);
+			final LeasedResource<?> resource = reservedResources.get(type);
 			if (resource == null) {
-				return false;
+				return;
 			}
 
 			if (resource.removeLeaseHolder(leaseHolder)) {
-				reservedResources.remove(type);
-				resource.dispose();
-				return true;
+				try {
+					reservedResources.remove(type);
+					resource.dispose();
+				}
+				finally {
+					releaser.accept(resource.size());
+				}
 
 Review comment:
   I'm not sure whether calling the hook even when `resource.dispose` failed is a good idea. From the existing implementation of `SharedResources$LeasedResource#dispose`, it throws exception when `disposed` is `true` which means the resource is already disposed, following this logic the invocation of the hook may cause a memory "double release" ? Or if we assume `SharedResources$LeasedResource` will only be used with the lock (yes with current implementation), maybe we could remove the protection of multi-threading there as well as the exception declaration of the `dispose` method?

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services