NoQ added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/Checkers/CPlusPlus11LockChecker.cpp:379-382
+void rm_bad1() {
+ rm1.lock(); // no-warning
+ rm1.lock(); // expected-warning{{This lock has already been acquired}}
+}
----------------
I repeat, this is a false positive. Recursive mutexes can be locked twice,
that's the whole point.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D85984/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D85984
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
