JDevlieghere wrote: > High level, I do not think it is a good idea to hold the top level API mutex > which is way too large locking scope. We should leave the decision to each > request handler for smaller scope locks if they want to ensure a critical > section. Can we revert the PR?
FWIW I don't necessarily agree with this observation. While I agree that a smaller critical section is better, conceptually a single request corresponds to a group of SB API calls. Making it the responsibility of the requests to group all SB API calls within the scope of the lock is a lot more error prone. What is the other lock involved in the deadlock, other than the API mutex? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137026 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
