[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Add error checking to DEADLOCK_AVOIDANCE macro

[David Vossel]

> On 2010-07-01 16:07:06, David Vossel wrote:
> > /branches/1.4/channels/chan_local.c, lines 186-197
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/751/diff/1/?file=11145#file11145line186>
> >
> >     This is dealing with some crazy scary stuff.  Are we seeing this actually happen?!
> >     
> >     Isn't other being returned locked here on error?

Ah, never mind, this is within the loop attempting to lock other.


- David


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/751/#review2322
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2010-06-28 13:36:49, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/751/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2010-06-28 13:36:49)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> If DEADLOCK_AVOIDANCE is called in a situation where the lock is not held, a deadlock could result.  While this is a programming error, we should at the very least send up a warning about the problem.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug 17407.
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=17407
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /branches/1.4/channels/chan_agent.c 266141 
>   /branches/1.4/channels/chan_dahdi.c 266141 
>   /branches/1.4/channels/chan_h323.c 266141 
>   /branches/1.4/channels/chan_local.c 266141 
>   /branches/1.4/include/asterisk/lock.h 266141 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/751/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> No functional changes.  Runs better according to reporter.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tilghman
> 
>