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.
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
pipes from subprocess_exec do not have extra info 'pipe' (incompatible with vanilla asyncio) #595
Comments
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
uvloop version:
0.19.0
Python version:
3.10.12
Platform:
linux
Can you reproduce the bug with
PYTHONASYNCIODEBUG
in env?:yes
Does uvloop behave differently from vanilla asyncio? How?:
Yes, this is the point of this issue report. So after you get your process transport from subprocess_exec(...) you then can use get_pipe_transport() to access the transport associated with stdin. With vanilla asyncio you can then call get_extra_info('pipe') on that transport to access the pipe directly. With uvloop get_extra_info('pipe') on the same transport returns None.
I can see in the source that when a pipe transport is created via loop.create_write_pipe(...) we have:
However no transp._add_extra_info(...) is done on the WriteUnixTransport that is created inside the UVProcessTransport code. There are ways to work around this (don't depend on getting access to that pipe) however this works fine in the asyncio loop implementation. I imagine it can be done without too much pain by wrapping the raw file descriptor created in the process transport code however I'm not super fluent in cython so I didn't attempt a patch.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: