On 24 June 2015 at 15:33, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
Nick Coghlan schrieb am 21.06.2015 um 03:28:
* there may be restrictions on some extension modules that limit them to "main interpreter only" (e.g. if the extension module itself isn't thread-safe, then it will need to remain fully protected by the GIL)
Just an idea, but C extensions could opt-in to this. Calling into them has to go through some kind of callable type, usually PyCFunction. We could protect all calls to extension types and C functions with a global runtime lock (per process, not per interpreter) and Extensions could set a flag on their functions and methods (or get it inherited from their extension types etc.) that says "I don't need the lock". That allows for a very fine-grained transition.
Exactly. PEP 489 helps facilitate opting in as well, right?
Yep, as PEP 489 requires subinterpreter compatibility as a precondition for using multi-phase initialisation :) Cheers, Nick. P.S. Technically, what it actually requires is support for "multiple instances of the module existing in the same process at the same time", as it really recreates the module if you remove it from sys.modules and import it again, unlike single phase initialisation. But that's a mouthful, so "must support subinterpreters" is an easier shorthand. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia