Skip to content

[CP-stable][win32] Remove the predicate from TimerThread condition variable - #193238

Merged
auto-submit[bot] merged 1 commit into
flutter:flutter-3.47-candidate.0from
flutteractionsbot:cp-stable-f263dec8c5e6049dcab4cec4c6f200d27c2c66ab
Sep 29, 2026
Merged

auto-submit[bot] merged 1 commit into
flutter:flutter-3.47-candidate.0from
flutteractionsbot:cp-stable-f263dec8c5e6049dcab4cec4c6f200d27c2c66ab

Conversation

@flutteractionsbot

@flutteractionsbot flutteractionsbot commented Sep 23, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request is created by automatic cherry pick workflow
Please fill in the form below, and a flutter domain expert will evaluate this cherry pick request.

Issue Link:

What is the link to the issue this cherry-pick is addressing?

#192513

Impact Description:

This impacts production apps on Windows. The apps can get stuck when waiting for a timer.

Workaround:

Is there a workaround for this issue?

No workaround

Risk:

What is the risk level of this cherry-pick?

  • Low
  • Medium
  • High

Test Coverage:

Are you confident that your fix is well-tested by automated tests?

  • Yes
  • No

Validation Steps:

What are the steps to validate that this fix works?

< Replace with validation steps here >

…tter#193181)

Right now we're not checking the next_fire_time_ in the predicate, which
means that when scheduling an earlier timer, we signal the condition
variable but because of the missing check it is ignored as spurious
wake-up.

This is the second time we got the predicate wrong. The loop can handle
spurious wake-ups just fine, so it's probably best to remove the
predicate.

This might account for some of the win32 tests flakiness.

## Pre-launch Checklist

- [x] I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined
there for submitting PRs.
- [x] I read the [AI contribution guidelines] and understand my
responsibilities, or I am not using AI tools.
- [x] I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my
responsibilities.
- [x] I read and followed the [Flutter Style Guide], including [Features
we expect every widget to implement].
- [x] I signed the [CLA].
- [x] I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description
above.
- [x] I updated/added relevant in-code documentation (doc comments with
`///`).
- [x] If this PR introduces a new feature or capability, I created and
linked a website documentation issue or PR in [flutter/website] (or
verified none is needed).
- [x] I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is
[test-exempt].
- [x] I followed the [breaking change policy] and added [Data Driven
Fixes] where supported.
- [x] All existing and new tests are passing.

If you need help, consider asking for advice on the #hackers-new channel
on [Discord].

If this change needs to override an active code freeze, provide a
comment explaining why. The code freeze workflow can be overridden by
code reviewers. See pinned issues for any active code freezes with
guidance.

**Note**: The Flutter team is currently trialing the use of [Gemini Code
Assist for
GitHub](https://developers.google.com/gemini-code-assist/docs/review-github-code).
Comments from the `gemini-code-assist` bot should not be taken as
authoritative feedback from the Flutter team. If you find its comments
useful you can update your code accordingly, but if you are unsure or
disagree with the feedback, please feel free to wait for a Flutter team
member's review for guidance on which automated comments should be
addressed.

<!-- Links -->
[Contributor Guide]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#overview
[AI contribution guidelines]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#ai-contribution-guidelines
[Tree Hygiene]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md
[test-exempt]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#tests
[Flutter Style Guide]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md
[Features we expect every widget to implement]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Style-guide-for-Flutter-repo.md#features-we-expect-every-widget-to-implement
[CLA]: https://cla.developers.google.com/
[flutter/tests]: https://github.com/flutter/tests
[flutter/website]: https://github.com/flutter/website
[breaking change policy]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Tree-hygiene.md#handling-breaking-changes
[Discord]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Chat.md
[Data Driven Fixes]:
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/blob/main/docs/contributing/Data-driven-Fixes.md
@flutteractionsbot flutteractionsbot added the cp: review Cherry-picks in the review queue label Sep 23, 2026
@flutteractionsbot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@knopp please fill out the PR description above, afterwards the release team will review this request.

@flutter-dashboard flutter-dashboard Bot added the CICD Run CI/CD label Sep 23, 2026
@flutteractionsbot
flutteractionsbot requested a review from a team as a code owner September 23, 2026 20:17
@flutter-dashboard

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This pull request was opened from and to a release candidate branch. This should only be done as part of the official Flutter release process. If you are attempting to make a regular contribution to the Flutter project, please close this PR and follow the instructions at Tree Hygiene for detailed instructions on contributing to Flutter.

Reviewers: Use caution before merging pull requests to release branches. Ensure the proper procedure has been followed.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added engine flutter/engine related. See also e: labels. platform-windows Building on or for Windows specifically a: desktop Running on desktop team-windows Owned by the Windows platform team labels Sep 23, 2026

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request modifies the timer thread main loop in task_runner_window.cc by removing the predicate from cv_.wait_until and replacing it with a manual time comparison. Feedback on this change highlights a potential issue where comparing next_fire_time_ against std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now() instead of the clock used by the condition variable (such as std::chrono::steady_clock) can lead to a 100% CPU busy loop due to clock discrepancies.

Comment thread engine/src/flutter/shell/platform/windows/task_runner_window.cc
@eyebrowsoffire

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@knopp Are we still looking to get this cherry-pick in? If so, can you complete the rest of the cherry-pick process (fill out the description, get some reviewers to look at this).

@knopp

knopp commented Sep 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Yes, this is still relevant. I've updated the description.

@loic-sharma loic-sharma left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@eyebrowsoffire eyebrowsoffire added the autosubmit Merge PR when tree becomes green via auto submit App label Sep 29, 2026
@auto-submit
auto-submit Bot merged commit c16aa05 into flutter:flutter-3.47-candidate.0 Sep 29, 2026
12 checks passed
@flutteractionsbot
flutteractionsbot deleted the cp-stable-f263dec8c5e6049dcab4cec4c6f200d27c2c66ab branch September 29, 2026 21:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

a: desktop Running on desktop autosubmit Merge PR when tree becomes green via auto submit App CICD Run CI/CD cp: review Cherry-picks in the review queue engine flutter/engine related. See also e: labels. platform-windows Building on or for Windows specifically team-windows Owned by the Windows platform team

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants