https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88230
--- Comment #23 from Pranav Kant <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Michael Meeks from comment #22) > Pranav - I was going to close this; but - can you look and see if this > change is necessary to make this more correct ? =) > > Thanks ! > > diff --git a/fpicker/source/win32/filepicker/asyncrequests.cxx > b/fpicker/source/win32/filepicker/asyncrequests.cxx > index 089beca..87e53fa 100644 > --- a/fpicker/source/win32/filepicker/asyncrequests.cxx > +++ b/fpicker/source/win32/filepicker/asyncrequests.cxx > @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ namespace vista{ > static void lcl_sleep( ::osl::Condition& aCondition, > ::sal_Int32 nMilliSeconds ) > { > + SolarMutexReleaser aReleaser; > + > if (nMilliSeconds < 1) > aCondition.wait(0); > else > @@ -41,8 +43,6 @@ static void lcl_sleep( ::osl::Condition& aCondition, > > void Request::wait( ::sal_Int32 nMilliSeconds ) > { > - SolarMutexReleaser aReleaser; > - > lcl_sleep( m_aJoiner, nMilliSeconds ); > } Looking at commit history around that code, I came across Bug 92460 fixed in c18f11587d37f285a95447dd8996c8b605732e00 Making this change would mean that we are trying to release a SolarMutex on a thread that doesn't ever lock it resulting UI freeze as reproduced by many in Bug 92460. So, no this change shouldn't go in. Please correct me if I am wrong. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Libreoffice-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
