aaronpuchert added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp:2199
+ // Take the exclusive capability to reduce further warnings.
+ return B.kind() == LK_Exclusive;
+ } else {
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> The old code was looking at `LDat1.kind() != LK_Exclusive` -- any reason this
> isn't `A.kind() != LK_Exclusive` as well?
Given that both should be equivalent (knowing `A.kind() != B.kind()` and that
there are just two kinds), I thought this condition fits better to the comment:
we select the lock that's exclusive, instead of not selecting the lock that's
not exclusive.
But I don't have a problem with `A.kind() != LK_Exclusive` if that sounds more
natural to you.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D102025/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D102025
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
