bpo-33608: Normalize atomic macros so that they all expect an atomic struct #12877
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
|
Looks good. It makes sense to me that the macro name implies the argument type. |
|
I triggered a custom buildbot run to validate this across the fleet. |
|
The custom buildbots seem happy enough, so I'll give Eric some time to review if he wants and then I'll merge. |
ericsnowcurrently
approved these changes
Apr 18, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The approach is good. It definitely reads better. :) I only had a chance to skim through the PR. If you'd like me to dig in and verify each line (which could be valuable given the sensitivity of this code) then I'll see about that tomorrow afternoon. Otherwise LGTM.
|
Mostly wanted an "OK" on the approach. The compiler is doing the most important checks |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@ericsnowcurrently @paulmon This should be an alternative fix to #12665.
Basically, any macro/function starting with
_Py_atomicnow always requires a reference to a_Py_atomicstruct, and never the extracted value.https://bugs.python.org/issue33608