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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Cleanup usages of stopwatch #16478
Cleanup usages of stopwatch #16478
Changes from 3 commits
c91f5da
af7a0c1
c0bb76b
24aa79c
040e35b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pretty much all the current usages of
awaitStarted
is preceded bysynchronized (startStopLock)
. Curious why this one doesn't have. I see this runs in an executor thread, but I'm wondering if the new synchronized block added below in line 242 should be moved up here.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not entirely sure if the
startStopLock
is really being used in the correct way in this entire class. Calling various methods on this lock (LifecycleLock
) doesn't require synchronizing on it. So left this as is until we plan to revisit this code.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would it be better to just have the lock synchronization in this method directly instead of relying on the different callers to do the right thing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, fair enough. I guess the only part which really needs the synchronization is the update of the failed attempt count and the stopwatch reset.
Btw,
@GuardedBy
forces the callers to do the right thing as it throws a compile-time error if not called from within the proper synchronization.