remove unneeded mutex in the client #2798
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2798 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.02% 86.02% -0.00%
==========================================
Files 133 133
Lines 12071 12069 -2
==========================================
- Hits 10384 10382 -2
Misses 1355 1355
Partials 332 332
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
egonelbre
changed the title
egonelbre
force-pushed
the
fix
branch
3 times, most recently
from
8ae6615 to
d8a7a74
Compare
marten-seemann
approved these changes
Sep 22, 2020
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM now. It looks like we don't need the mutex in the client any more, so this is a nice simplification.
Thank you @egonelbre!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #2717.
For s.currentFrame, it seems unlock/lock could be previously used, when it was using separate frame type, however, I don't think it's safe as mentioned in the issue.
In the dial, it's only calling recursively itself the mutex seems unnecessary. I think it was added because of the
go funcprobably causing a race, however that doesn't fix the underlying potential race.Note, I'm not sure, whether these changes are correct.