aharries-upmem added a comment.
In D93479#2839076 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D93479#2839076>, @jingham wrote:
> I wonder if instead of doing:
>
> // Use our target to get a shared pointer to ourselves...
> if (m_finalize_called && !PrivateStateThreadIsValid())
> BroadcastEvent(event_sp);
> else
> m_private_state_broadcaster.BroadcastEvent(event_sp);
>
> ->
>
> m_private_state_broadcaster.BroadcastEvent(event_sp);
>
> we should have just replaced m_finalize_called with m_finalizing? If you
> tried to sent the exited event to the private event broadcaster after it was
> shut down, that event would never get to the public process event queue.
Hi Jim, I've tried reverting this check and replacing `m_finalize_called` with
`m_finalizing`, but sadly the code still seems to deadlock.
I'm also a little suspicious of (in `Process::Finalize`):
if (m_finalizing.exchange(true))
return;
rather than
m_finalize_called = true;
As it would seem (to me) to introduce the possibility of an early exit where
there wasn't one before. I don't know if that was intended (to avoid things
being done twice?), but it's the only other place I can see a clear change in
control flow.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D93479/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D93479
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
