Currently, the only thing in the system that donates a thread
to run it is swift_runAndBlockThread, but we'll probably need
others. Nothing in the concurrency runtime should block via a
semaphore in this configuration.
As an outrageous hack, work around the layering problems with
using libdispatch from the concurrency library on non-Darwin
systems by making those systems use the cooperative global
executor. This is only acceptable as a temporary solution
for landing this change and setting things onto the right
long-term design.
We expect to iterate on this quite a bit, both publicly
and internally, but this is a fine starting-point.
I've renamed runAsync to runAsyncAndBlock to underline
very clearly what it does and why it's not long for this
world. I've also had to give it a radically different
implementation in an effort to make it continue to work
given an actor implementation that is no longer just
running all work synchronously.
The major remaining bit of actor-scheduling work is to
make swift_task_enqueue actually do something sensible
based on the executor it's been given; currently it's
expecting a flag that IRGen simply doesn't know to set.
Use the StackAllocator as task allocator.
TODO: we could pass an initial pre-allocated first slab to the allocator, which is allocated on the stack or with the parent task's allocator.
rdar://problem/71157018
libdispatch is not part of the system on Linux and Windows, and dispatch
has not been used for the standard library up until this point. The
current usage is limited to the Apple platforms, so rather than adding
another build of dispatch, conditionally include the header instead.
Switch the contract between the runtime operation `swift_future_task_wait`
and Task.Handle.get() pver to an asynchronous call, so that the
compiler will set up the resumption frame for us. This allows us to
correctly wait on futures.
Update our "basic" future test to perform both normal returns and
throwing returns from a future, either having to wait on the queue or
coming by afterward.
Introduce `FutureAsyncContext` to line up with the async context formed
by IR generation for the type `<T> () async throws -> T`. When allocating
a future task, set up the context with the address of the future's storage
for the successful result and null out the error result, so the caller
will directly fill in the result. This eliminates a bunch of extra
complexity and a copy.
Use a single atomic for the wait queue that combines the status with
the first task in the queue. Address race conditions in waiting and
completing the future.
Thanks to John for setting the direction here for me.
Extend AsyncTask and the concurrency runtime with basic support for
task futures. AsyncTasks with futures contain a future fragment with
information about the type produced by the future, and where the
future will put the result value or the thrown error in the initial
context.
We still don't have the ability to schedule the waiting tasks on an
executor when the future completes, so this isn't useful for anything
just test, and we can only test limited code paths.
