bulbazord added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/source/Core/Communication.cpp:43 + std::unique_lock guard(m_shared_mutex); LLDB_LOG(GetLog(LLDBLog::Communication), ---------------- JDevlieghere wrote: > augusto2112 wrote: > > Do you think it's possible that between the call to `Clear` and this lock > > someone acquires the lock? > Yes, you're both correct. We can't use the `ClearUnlocked` trick here because > it's `Disconnect` that locks and `Clear` is virtual. I'll need to play around > with this. Maybe we don't need a `Clear` and we can call `DisconnectUnlocked` > directly ? Yeah calling `Disconnect` in an unlocked fashion would solve that if you called it after locking in `Connect`. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D157159/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D157159 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
