bulbazord added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/source/Host/posix/PipePosix.cpp:69 PipeBase::operator=(std::move(pipe_posix)); - m_fds[READ] = pipe_posix.ReleaseReadFileDescriptor(); - m_fds[WRITE] = pipe_posix.ReleaseWriteFileDescriptor(); + std::lock_guard<std::mutex> guard(m_lock); + m_fds[READ] = pipe_posix.ReleaseReadFileDescriptorUnlocked(); ---------------- I think this lock needs to be at the beginning. Scenario: Thread 1 calls the move assign operator and performs the base move assign. Gets unscheduled before acquiring lock. Thread 2 calls the move assign operator and performs the base move assign. Acquires the lock, fills in `m_fds`, and returns. Thread 1 is scheduled again, grabs the lock, and fills in `m_fds`. `this` will have its `PipeBase` members filled in by the Thread 2 call while `m_fds` will be filled in by the Thread 1 call. Granted, one thread may be surprised that suddenly the thing didn't get moved in as expected, but at least `this` will be in a consistent state. I think you also need to lock the mutex of `pipe_posix` at the same time. Imagine Thread 1 is trying to access something from `pipe_posix` while Thread 2 is trying to move it into another `PipePosix` object. (Not sure how likely this scenario is but I'd rather be safe than sorry). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D157654/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D157654 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
