Cleanup Request mutex usage#455
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As I was working on the
filexferPR again, I noticed some use of mutex-protected values outside of holding a mutex, and then not only do all the copies point to the same mutex, but also, because this mutex has to be set, the use of&sftp.Request{}will always generate an invalid structure that will panic.I realize the pointer to mutex was there so that
*r2 = *rwould work and not generate an error duringgo vetthat a mutex is being copied, but this design unfortunately creates even more issues than it solved. I tried a bunch of different ways to keep the pointer, but still have&sftp.Request{}not immediately be incurably invalid, but any solutions to this also require a mutex, which is the very problem we’re trying to avoid. We’re then stuck with having to copy values around the mutex. 🙁 A redesign might be necessary to avoid all mutex usage, I am unsure.Along with cleaning up the mutex usage, I linted a lot of
request.go, breaking some lines up, paragraphing, and removing an unused parameter torunLs(), so we can remove some unused path cleanup work, which then removes some imports in bothserver.goandrequest.go.