bulbazord added a comment. In D157041#4559255 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D157041#4559255>, @augusto2112 wrote:
>> Do all of these need to be protected with a mutex? In your description >> you're saying TSan is detecting data races. What piece of data are you >> observing the data race on? > > Only SetAsBoolean/GetAsBoolean are being caught when running our test suite > at the moment. > >> Do we need a recursive mutex? I assume that these operations might call into >> each other, but if not it would be nice to just have it be a std::mutex. > > If we want to protect all accesses then yes, since these functions call each > other. It we decide to only lock against what's being caught by tsan then we > can get by with a regular mutex. Only `SetAsBoolean` and `GetAsBoolean` are being caught right now, I see. The implementation of those methods really isn't any different (AFAICT) from the other methods so I would assume we would need to protect all the other `Get` and `Set` methods as well then, makes sense. I'd probably keep the recursive mutex for now then. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D157041/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D157041 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
