15.12.2021 22:39, John Snow wrote:
This exception can be injected into any await statement. If we are
canceled via timeout, we want to clear the pending execution record on
our way out.
Hmm, but there are more await statements in the file, shouldn't we care about
them too ?
Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com>
---
python/qemu/aqmp/qmp_client.py | 8 ++++++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/python/qemu/aqmp/qmp_client.py b/python/qemu/aqmp/qmp_client.py
index 8105e29fa8..6a985ffe30 100644
--- a/python/qemu/aqmp/qmp_client.py
+++ b/python/qemu/aqmp/qmp_client.py
@@ -435,7 +435,11 @@ async def _issue(self, msg: Message) -> Union[None, str]:
msg_id = msg['id']
self._pending[msg_id] = asyncio.Queue(maxsize=1)
- await self._outgoing.put(msg)
+ try:
+ await self._outgoing.put(msg)
+ except:
Doesn't pylint and others complain about plain "except". Do we really need to
catch any exception here? As far as I know that's not a good practice.
+ del self._pending[msg_id]
+ raise
return msg_id
@@ -452,9 +456,9 @@ async def _reply(self, msg_id: Union[str, None]) -> Message:
was lost, or some other problem.
"""
queue = self._pending[msg_id]
- result = await queue.get()
try:
+ result = await queue.get()
if isinstance(result, ExecInterruptedError):
raise result
return result
This one looks good, just include it into existing try-finally
Hmm. _issue() and _reply() are used only in one place, as a pair. It looks like both
"awaits" should be better under one try-finally block.
For example, move "self._pending[msg_id] = asyncio.Queue(maxsize=1)" to
_execute, and just do try-finally in _execute() around _issue and _reply. Or may be just
merge the whole logic in _execute, it doesn't seem too much. What do you think?
--
Best regards,
Vladimir
