bpo-46771: Implement task cancel requests by Tinche · Pull Request #31513 · python/cpython · GitHub

Keep track of requested task cancellations as an int, instead of a bool.

https://bugs.python.org/issue46771

So this needs to be reviewed carefully by @agronholm and @Tinche -- not so much regarding "code review" but regarding "does this address our concerns, does it fix the edge cases, can we implement Trio-like behavior in 3rd party libraries when we need it". I'd also like @cjerdonek to think about this.

We also, separately, need to debate whether the lines

        if self._num_cancels_requested > 1:
            return False

should stay in or not. IIRC @agronholm has claimed that this (or the previous incarnation) broke several AnyIO tests.

There are two aspects that would change if we removed these two lines:

The cancel message. See https://bugs.python.org/issue46829. In 3.10, after t.cancel("first"); t.cancel("2nd") the cancel message ended up being set to "2nd"; with 3.11 main it ends up "first". If we remove these two lines it would become "2nd" again.
How many CancelledError exceptions will the task see? In 3.10, the task may see multiple cancellations -- but it may not. In particular, if the second cancel() call finds the must-cancel flag already set, only one cancellation will be delivered. However, if the first cancellation is delivered, and the task catches the CancelledError and then uses await to do some cleanup, in 3.10 (and again if we remove those two lines) that cleanup await will be cancelled; but if we keep those two lines, that await will be shielded.

The more I think about it, the more I believe we should keep the two lines in cancel(), so I am merging this as-is. Thanks @Tinche. (Your first PR merged into CPython, I believe -- congrats!)

Is the cancelling() the best name for returning the number or cancel requests?
It was good for bool flag, a counter needs better name IMHO.

Hm, do you have a suggestion? I was thinking that it's still usable as a "truthy" value. Usually when you're interested in the cancel count you should call uncancel() and use its return value.

I have no good answer.
cancel_requests_count() describes exact meaning but the name is too long.
cancelling() can return bool but it looks like procrastination: why return less info than we really have.
The third option is dropping cancelling() method entirely, it is not required by the current asyncio code.
We can consider adding the method later on-demand.

Note: .cancelling() doesn't exist in Python 3.10

It's used in TaskGroup currently, so if we were to delete it we'd have to rewrite the code there in this same PR. It's also used by Task.__repr__() (via _task_repr_info()). But of those will work even though we upgraded it from a bool to an int. I'd say let's keep it for now, if we regret it we can rename or remove it before beta 1.

Deal!

Great! Let me take another look if any of the method comments need rewrites.

As for cancelling(), while thinking about this PR I came to the same conclusion as you folks (that it's not needed) but I left it in. In the process I rewrote the TaskGroup very slightly to not use it (and potentially cancel its children only once). We're leaving cancelling(), but would this TaskGroup patch also be interesting?

Yes, I am very much interested in your TaskGroup PR. There are a couple of things there that could be improved:

It doesn't always preserve the cancel message (since it does propagate_cancellation_error = et instead of propagate_cancellation_error = exc -- I don't know why not, could be a carry-over from the pre-3.9 days when it didn't matter).
There's weirdness around self._base_error. It seems that if __aexit__() receives a CancelledError (which is a base error) then that will always be raised (L124) before we get to raise propagate_cancellation_error (L130)?
We could, if we wanted, distinguish between a child task being cancelled by TaskGroup._abort()` and it being cancelled for some other reason. Currently, if it's the latter, the CancellationError from the child task is swallowed and treated as if it exited successfully.

There's also some weirdness around self._on_completed_fut. It is set to None twice (once in the while loop and once after the loop has finished). But this is not related to cancellation (and the issue is benign).

@Tinche I forgot to mention: I'm waiting for you before I land it. If you don't mind I'd rather see the TaskGroup changes in a separate PR (since this PR is complete as-is and the TaskGroup improvements should probably be tagged with bpo-46752).

@gvanrossum Roger, task group will be a different PR. I tweaked the docstrings, please merge if it's good.

Great! Will merge now (for real).

Oh, you have to re-run clinic (make clinic) and commit and push the resulting changes. (Done)

Congrats @Tinche on your first merged Python PR! Thanks for your patience. I hope this will ease the pain for Quattro.

Thank you kindly. I will get started on a TaskGroup PR soon.

Implement task cancel requests

a231718

Tinche requested review from 1st1 and asvetlov as code owners February 22, 2022 23:29

bedevere-bot added the awaiting review label Feb 22, 2022

the-knights-who-say-ni added the CLA signed label Feb 22, 2022

Tinche mentioned this pull request Feb 22, 2022

bpo-46771: Implement asyncio context managers for handling timeouts #31394

Merged

gvanrossum approved these changes Feb 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

bedevere-bot added awaiting merge and removed awaiting review labels Feb 23, 2022

asvetlov reviewed Feb 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

gvanrossum added the skip news label Feb 23, 2022

asvetlov approved these changes Feb 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

Tweak task docstrings

ab5bce9

gvanrossum reviewed Feb 24, 2022

View reviewed changes

Run make regen-all

532a5be

gvanrossum merged commit 7fce106 into python:main Feb 24, 2022

bedevere-bot removed the awaiting merge label Feb 24, 2022

achimnol mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2022

Add shutdown timeout to PersistentTaskGroup achimnol/aiotools#33

Open

asvetlov deleted the issue-46771-cancel-requests-2 branch February 24, 2022 09:56

Tinche mentioned this pull request Feb 25, 2022

bpo-46752: Taskgroup tweaks #31559

Merged

gvanrossum mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2022

asyncio.Task: .cancelling() and .uncancel() now return int, not bool python/typeshed#7405

Merged

gvanrossum mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2022

Introduce task groups to asyncio and change task cancellation semantics #90908

Closed

gvanrossum mentioned this pull request May 24, 2022

Implement asyncio.timeout() context manager #90927

Closed

coderabbitai Bot mentioned this pull request Jul 26, 2026

0.5.3 3dg1luk43/ha_washdata#327

Merged

		@@ -217,14 +217,12 @@ def cancel(self, msg=None):
		return True

		def cancelling(self):

bpo-46771: Implement task cancel requests by Tinche · Pull Request #31513 · python/cpython · GitHub

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bpo-46771: Implement task cancel requests - #31513

bpo-46771: Implement task cancel requests#31513gvanrossum merged 3 commits intopython:mainpython/cpython:mainfrom asvetlov:issue-46771-cancel-requests-2asvetlov/cpython:issue-46771-cancel-requests-2Copy head branch name to clipboard

Conversation

Tinche commented Feb 22, 2022 • edited by bedevere-bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gvanrossum commented Feb 22, 2022

Uh oh!

gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

asvetlov Feb 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gvanrossum Feb 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

asvetlov Feb 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

asvetlov Feb 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gvanrossum Feb 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

asvetlov Feb 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Tinche commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

gvanrossum commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

gvanrossum commented Feb 23, 2022 • edited by bedevere-bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Tinche commented Feb 24, 2022

Uh oh!

gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gvanrossum commented Feb 24, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gvanrossum commented Feb 24, 2022

Uh oh!

Tinche commented Feb 24, 2022

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

bpo-46771: Implement task cancel requests#31513
gvanrossum merged 3 commits into
python:mainfrom
asvetlov:issue-46771-cancel-requests-2

Tinche commented Feb 22, 2022 •
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

gvanrossum commented Feb 23, 2022 •
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

gvanrossum commented Feb 24, 2022 •
edited
Loading