Keith Kyzivat wrote: > > On 3/21/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > Would it be possible to make it like this? > > take lock on the manager > > take the lock on the connection/device, > > release the manager lock > > invoke the frame push to the driver > > release the lock on the connection/device, > > take lock on the manager > > release the manager lock > > I haven't looked at the code so I don't know if it would be > possible but > clearly the locking pattern shown previously is deadlock prone and has > to be fixed. > > > Maybe I'm seeing this wrong - but what would be the point of the > second acquire of the lock, if you're going to immediately release it > without doing anything under it? > I didn't know what code you have in those locked sections, I just made a suggestion to fix the deadly embrace problem. If the last section would be empty then there is no need for lock as you say.
Jaroslav Libak _______________________________________________ sipxtapi-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipxtapi-dev/
