Skip to content

fix: release already created pools on NewMultiPool failure#394

Merged
panjf2000 merged 1 commit into
panjf2000:devfrom
vibe-sudo:fix/multipool-leak-on-create
May 24, 2026
Merged

fix: release already created pools on NewMultiPool failure#394
panjf2000 merged 1 commit into
panjf2000:devfrom
vibe-sudo:fix/multipool-leak-on-create

Conversation

@vibe-sudo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

Added cleanup logic to release pools if NewMultiPool fails halfway.

Why

If creating a sub-pool fails in the middle of the loop, the already created pools were not released, leading to resource leaks.

Changes

  • File: multipool.go
  • File: multipool_func.go
  • File: multipool_func_generic.go
  • Added a loop to call Release() on all previously created pools when an error occurs.

Risk

Low risk, only adds cleanup logic.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented May 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 94.76%. Comparing base (2ba2dd1) to head (c4a4239).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
multipool.go 0.00% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
multipool_func.go 0.00% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
multipool_func_generic.go 0.00% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #394      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.47%   94.76%   -0.72%     
==========================================
  Files          14       14              
  Lines         796      802       +6     
==========================================
  Hits          760      760              
- Misses         25       28       +3     
- Partials       11       14       +3     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 94.76% <0.00%> (-0.72%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@panjf2000

panjf2000 commented May 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

there is an intermittent CI failure that was fixed recently; please rebase the latest dev branch onto your PR and push your commits, so we can rerun the CI against your commits.

@panjf2000 panjf2000 added the pending development Requested PR owner to improve code and waiting for the result label May 24, 2026
@vibe-sudo vibe-sudo force-pushed the fix/multipool-leak-on-create branch from 1a11851 to c4a4239 Compare May 24, 2026 14:12
@vibe-sudo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hi @panjf2000 ,
I've rebased both PRs onto the latest dev branch. I was also trying to fix the data race locally, but didn't finish before your reply. It's a pity, but I'm still very grateful for your guidance!

@panjf2000 panjf2000 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@panjf2000 panjf2000 added pending merged This PR has been reviewed and approved and removed pending development Requested PR owner to improve code and waiting for the result labels May 24, 2026
@panjf2000 panjf2000 merged commit 4782ebe into panjf2000:dev May 24, 2026
11 of 13 checks passed
panjf2000 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 25, 2026
* chore: use my referral link of DO

* docs: correct WithNonblocking comment about its returned error (#390)

* fix: make Reboot() wait for pool to fully release before resetting state (#395)

* fix: resolve data race on poolCommon.once field using atomic.Pointer

The data race occurred between Reboot() writing p.once = &sync.Once{}
and worker goroutines reading p.once.Do(...) concurrently.

Fix: change the once field from *sync.Once to atomic.Pointer[sync.Once]
so all reads (Load) and writes (Store) are atomic.

Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/panjf2000/ants/sessions/b2f67c6c-ed78-4758-9185-643b3e09d143

Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix: make Reboot() wait for all workers to exit before resetting pool

The root cause of the data race is that Reboot() resets pool state
(once, allDone) while workers are still shutting down and accessing
those same fields.

Fix: Reboot() now waits on the allDone channel (which is closed when
the last worker exits) before resetting pool state. This ensures no
worker goroutine is running when the fields are reassigned, eliminating
the data race without needing atomic wrappers.

Reverts the atomic.Pointer[sync.Once] approach in favor of this
fundamental fix.

Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/panjf2000/ants/sessions/7b1d6e25-546a-40ef-b31d-33e824186b31

Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix: also wait for purge/ticktock goroutines to exit in Reboot()

Ensures the old purge and ticktock goroutines have fully exited
(set their done flags) before Reboot() resets those flags and
starts new goroutines. This prevents a logic race where the old
goroutine could set purgeDone/ticktockDone=1 after Reboot() resets
them to 0.

Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/panjf2000/ants/sessions/480234c8-a50f-4dc3-9352-0b337ebfc5d3

Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

* chore: improve variable naming in binarySearch (#393)

* fix: release created pools on NewMultiPool failure (#394)

* chore: replace 1<<31-1 with math.MaxInt32 (#392)

* fix: move once.Do(close(allDone)) from Reboot() to Release() (#397)

* fix: use atomic.Pointer for once field to prevent data race in Reboot

The data race occurred between Reboot() writing p.once = &sync.Once{}
and worker goroutines reading p.once to call once.Do(close(allDone)).

By using atomic.Pointer[sync.Once], all reads (Load) and writes (Store)
to the once field are properly synchronized.

Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/panjf2000/ants/sessions/4a1d1b13-0a7f-4167-ae12-429e7719ea32

Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix: use sync.WaitGroup to ensure all worker goroutines fully exit before Reboot

Revert the superficial atomic.Pointer fix. The real issue is that
Reboot() proceeded after allDone (running count hit 0) while worker
goroutines were still executing deferred cleanup code.

Add workerWg sync.WaitGroup to poolCommon. Each worker goroutine calls
wg.Add(1) before spawning and defer wg.Done() as the outermost defer
(runs last). Reboot() calls workerWg.Wait() after <-allDone to block
until every goroutine has fully exited before resetting pool state.

Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/panjf2000/ants/sessions/758f404a-fab6-4a4e-8f42-ea4fdfd2ab9a

Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix: call workerWg.Add(1) before addRunning(1) for defensive ordering

Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/panjf2000/ants/sessions/758f404a-fab6-4a4e-8f42-ea4fdfd2ab9a

Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix: move once.Do(close(allDone)) to Release() instead of Reboot()

This is the fundamental fix: Release() is the proper place to close
allDone when no workers are running, since it's the operation that
transitions the pool to CLOSED state. If workers are still running,
the last one to exit closes allDone in its defer as before.

This eliminates the race between Reboot() and running workers on
once.Do, and removes the unnecessary workerWg complexity.

Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/panjf2000/ants/sessions/0d78b737-d4ef-4dbd-b021-3e532757c1f9

Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: hehaifeng526 <54569318+vibe-sudo@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: panjf2000 <7496278+panjf2000@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

pending merged This PR has been reviewed and approved

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants