On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 7:14 PM Will Mortensen <w...@extrahop.com> wrote: > This comment on ProcSleep() seems to have the values of dontWait > backward (double negatives are tricky): > > * Result: PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK if we acquired the lock, > PROC_WAIT_STATUS_ERROR > * if not (if dontWait = true, this is a deadlock; if dontWait = false, we > * would have had to wait). > > Also there's a minor typo in a comment in LockAcquireExtended(): > > * Check the proclock entry status. If dontWait = true, this is an > * expected case; otherwise, it will open happen if something in the > * ipc communication doesn't work correctly. > > "open" should be "only".
Here's a patch fixing those typos.
v1-0001-Fix-typos-from-LOCK-NOWAIT-improvement.patch
Description: Binary data