Skip to content

Conversation

hebasto
Copy link
Member

@hebasto hebasto commented Aug 3, 2020

Split out from #19306.

Only trivial thread safety annotations and lock assertions added. No new locks. No behavior change.

This is a step to make CTxMemPool::cs an instance of Mutex rather RecursiveMutex.

@hebasto hebasto marked this pull request as draft August 3, 2020 13:46
@hebasto hebasto marked this pull request as ready for review August 3, 2020 13:50
@practicalswift
Copy link
Contributor

Concept ACK: thanks for adding thread-safety annotations!

@DrahtBot
Copy link
Contributor

DrahtBot commented Aug 3, 2020

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

@hebasto
Copy link
Member Author

hebasto commented Nov 8, 2020

Rebased ef803c3 -> dd427dd (pr19652.02 -> pr19652.03) due to the conflict with #19572.

This change avoids locking CTxMemPool::cs recursively in
Mempool{Info}ToJSON() functions.
@hebasto
Copy link
Member Author

hebasto commented Dec 7, 2020

Rebased dd427dd -> 09b1ef2 (pr19652.03 -> pr19652.04) due to the conflict with #18766.

@DrahtBot
Copy link
Contributor

🐙 This pull request conflicts with the target branch and needs rebase.

Want to unsubscribe from rebase notifications on this pull request? Just convert this pull request to a "draft".

@hebasto hebasto closed this Aug 24, 2021
@bitcoin bitcoin locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 24, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants