WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Search+
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED FIXED
101015
[EFL][WK2] Use MutexLocker instead of lock()/unlock().
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101015
Summary
[EFL][WK2] Use MutexLocker instead of lock()/unlock().
Byungwoo Lee
Reported
2012-11-01 22:29:44 PDT
Using MutexLocker will be better than using lock()/unlock() explicitly.
Attachments
Patch
(4.12 KB, patch)
2012-11-02 00:06 PDT
,
Byungwoo Lee
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(3.81 KB, patch)
2012-11-02 00:33 PDT
,
Byungwoo Lee
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(1)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Byungwoo Lee
Comment 1
2012-11-02 00:06:18 PDT
Created
attachment 171990
[details]
Patch
Byungwoo Lee
Comment 2
2012-11-02 00:18:37 PDT
Comment on
attachment 171990
[details]
Patch Only performWork() and performTimerWork() should be changed. The locking scope of dispatchAfterDelay is discussing in
Bug 98978
.
Byungwoo Lee
Comment 3
2012-11-02 00:33:36 PDT
Created
attachment 171997
[details]
Patch
Kenneth Rohde Christiansen
Comment 4
2012-11-02 02:57:17 PDT
Comment on
attachment 171997
[details]
Patch View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=171997&action=review
> Source/WebKit2/Platform/efl/WorkQueueEfl.cpp:80 > + { > + MutexLocker locker(m_workItemQueueLock); > + if (m_workItemQueue.isEmpty()) > + return; > + > + m_workItemQueue.swap(workItemQueue); > + }
Why do you need to lock if the queue is empty?
Byungwoo Lee
Comment 5
2012-11-02 03:02:38 PDT
(In reply to
comment #4
)
> (From update of
attachment 171997
[details]
) > View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=171997&action=review
> > > Source/WebKit2/Platform/efl/WorkQueueEfl.cpp:80 > > + { > > + MutexLocker locker(m_workItemQueueLock); > > + if (m_workItemQueue.isEmpty()) > > + return; > > + > > + m_workItemQueue.swap(workItemQueue); > > + } > > Why do you need to lock if the queue is empty?
Because m_workItemQueue is the shared resource that can be accessed on multiple thread at one time. I think protecting all the access to the shared resource will be safe.
Byungwoo Lee
Comment 6
2012-11-02 03:03:34 PDT
(In reply to
comment #5
)
> (In reply to
comment #4
) > > (From update of
attachment 171997
[details]
[details]) > > View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=171997&action=review
> > > > > Source/WebKit2/Platform/efl/WorkQueueEfl.cpp:80 > > > + { > > > + MutexLocker locker(m_workItemQueueLock); > > > + if (m_workItemQueue.isEmpty()) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + m_workItemQueue.swap(workItemQueue); > > > + } > > > > Why do you need to lock if the queue is empty? > > Because m_workItemQueue is the shared resource that can be accessed on multiple thread at one time. > > I think protecting all the access to the shared resource will be safe.
(And the lock will be released when the function returns.)
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 7
2012-11-02 06:01:05 PDT
Comment on
attachment 171997
[details]
Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 171997 Committed
r133289
: <
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/133289
>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 8
2012-11-02 06:01:11 PDT
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug