Code review comment for lp:~vanvugt/mir/surface-states
Revision history for this message
| Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote | # |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
a60fb26
(Get the code!)
Mir's unclear use of threads scares me. If state_value needs to be atomic then so does type_value. That's an existing problem which pre-dates this proposal. If it is a problem at all...
Please document Mir's thread usage and which classes may be accessed concurrently.
I'm not going to fix the atomicity of state_value while adjacent members are not atomic, and I'm not entirely sure or convinced that concurrent access is required yet.