clayborg requested changes to this revision.
clayborg added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Maybe instead of "NoLock" on the functions we those functions take an extra
argument? Then someone can't accidentally run one of those without locking. We
need to somehow enforce that locking must occur. Maybe passing an extra:
const GDBRemoteClientBase::Lock &lock
Making it const can stop people from locking it in the NoLock functions, and we
can maybe assert:
bool
GDBRemoteCommunicationClient::SetCurrentThread(uint64_t tid, const
GDBRemoteClientBase::Lock &lock)
{
assert(lock.IsAcquired());
Then IsAcquired() can be const, but this at least would enforce that someone
needs to lock before sending the packet. We probably need to document these no
locking commands and let users know they must lock and pass in the lock for
verification.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23802
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
