On Wednesday 20 February 2002 11:28, you wrote: > IIRC, that is supposed to be OK. As I wrote it, I think, the terminate() > method would in fact take both locks, but because it could not enter > that part twice, it could not result in a deadlock. The > ConnectionHandler has changed a lot since I last rewrote it though (it > took about 12 hours before Tavin decided that my defensive features were > redundant and removed them IIRC). I think it's still ok. More eyes couldn't hurt though.
--gj > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 11:00:13AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > Hi Oskar: > > I found at least one place where ConnectionHanlder is holding sendLock > > and receiveLock at the same time. Is that ok? > > > > -- gj > > > > e.g. > > CH.SendOutputStream.done() (acquires sendLock) > > CH.terminate() -- (acquires receiveLock) > > -- Freesite (0.4) freenet:SSK at npfV5XQijFkF6sXZvuO0o~kG4wEPAgM/homepage// _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
