================
@@ -5992,8 +5992,42 @@ Target::TargetEventData::GetModuleListFromEvent(const
Event *event_ptr) {
return module_list;
}
+APIMutexHandle::APIMutexHandle() = default;
+
+APIMutexHandle::APIMutexHandle(lldb::TargetSP target_sp)
+ : m_target_sp(std::move(target_sp)) {}
+
+void APIMutexHandle::lock() {
+ if (m_target_sp)
+ m_target_sp->GetAPIMutex().lock();
+ else
+ m_standalone_mutex.lock();
+}
+
+void APIMutexHandle::unlock() {
+ if (m_target_sp)
+ m_target_sp->GetAPIMutex().unlock();
+ else
+ m_standalone_mutex.unlock();
+}
+
+bool APIMutexHandle::try_lock() {
+ if (m_target_sp)
+ return m_target_sp->GetAPIMutex().try_lock();
+ return m_standalone_mutex.try_lock();
+}
+
std::recursive_mutex &Target::GetAPIMutex() {
Policy policy = PolicyStack::Get().Current();
+
+ // Every caller still locks *something* here, rather than a no-op: since
+ // the mutex is thread-local, that lock never contends with whatever
+ // other thread holds the real one.
----------------
JDevlieghere wrote:
My original comment about a Python script that locks an SBMutex inside a
callback and unlocks it outside, is still unaddressed, right?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/208242
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
