Hi Mark, On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 9:38 AM Mark Wielaard <m...@klomp.org> wrote: > > Hi Aaron, > > On Fri, 2024-08-02 at 19:38 -0400, Aaron Merey wrote: > > From: Heather McIntyre <h...@rice.edu> > > > > Add dwarf_lock for Dwarf as well as abbrev_lock for Dwarf_CU. > > > > * libdw/dwarf_begin_elf.c (dwarf_begin_elf): Init dwarf_lock. > > * libdw/dwarf_end.c (cu_free): Free abbrev_lock. > > (dwarf_end): Free dwarf_lock. > > * libdw/libdwP.h (struct Dwarf): Define dwarf_lock. > > (struct Dwarf_CU): Define abbrev_lock. > > * libdw/libdw_findcu.c (__libdw_intern_next_unit): Init > > abbrev_lock. > > > > Signed-off-by: Heather S. McIntyre <h...@rice.edu> > > Signed-off-by: Aaron Merey <ame...@redhat.com> > > > > --- > > v3 changes: > > New patch added in v3 that contains rwlock changes previously in patch 3/9 > > v2. > > The patch itself looks correct. But I think I would have introduced the > locks separately and/or in the first patch that used them (dwarf_getalt > for the dwarf_lock, dwarf_formref_die and __libdw_dieabbrev for > abbrev_lock). > > It might also be a good idea to explicitly document which structure > fields are "protected" by the separate locks to make reasoning about > them a little easier.
Done. The dwarf_lock changes were squashed into commit 7c4fcff44ae and the abbrev_lock changes were squashed into commit 28b74a1bf73. Aaron
