You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@maven.apache.org by "Guillaume Nodet (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2021/05/04 15:17:00 UTC
[jira] [Updated] (MRESOLVER-179) NamedLocks should be acquired in
an ordered way
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-179?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Guillaume Nodet updated MRESOLVER-179:
--------------------------------------
Description:
[~michael-o] [~cstamas] I was about to start porting my simple SyncContext to maven-resolver and start working on a PR when I saw that the API has changed a lot with the introduction of NamedLocks.
I see some design problems in the new API. Multiple locks are now acquired in sequence instead of using a coarse grained call. This can lead to deadlocks as one client could try to lock {{a}} then {{b}} while another one could try to lock {{b}} then {{a}}, leading to a possible deadlock.
It should be just a matter to order them inside the {{AdaptedLockSyncContext.acquire}} call which is the only location where the API is used.
I'll provide a PR asap.
was:
[~michal-o] [~cstamas] I was about to start porting my simple SyncContext to maven-resolver and start working on a PR when I saw that the API has changed a lot with the introduction of NamedLocks.
I see some design problems in the new API. Multiple locks are now acquired in sequence instead of using a coarse grained call. This can lead to deadlocks as one client could try to lock {{a}} then {{b}} while another one could try to lock {{b}} then {{a}}, leading to a possible deadlock.
It should be just a matter to order them inside the {{AdaptedLockSyncContext.acquire}} call which is the only location where the API is used.
I'll provide a PR asap.
> NamedLocks should be acquired in an ordered way
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MRESOLVER-179
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-179
> Project: Maven Resolver
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Guillaume Nodet
> Priority: Major
>
> [~michael-o] [~cstamas] I was about to start porting my simple SyncContext to maven-resolver and start working on a PR when I saw that the API has changed a lot with the introduction of NamedLocks.
> I see some design problems in the new API. Multiple locks are now acquired in sequence instead of using a coarse grained call. This can lead to deadlocks as one client could try to lock {{a}} then {{b}} while another one could try to lock {{b}} then {{a}}, leading to a possible deadlock.
> It should be just a matter to order them inside the {{AdaptedLockSyncContext.acquire}} call which is the only location where the API is used.
> I'll provide a PR asap.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)