Skip to content

bpo-40221: Update ForkAwareThreadLock to use _at_fork_reinit #19477

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
corona10 merged 2 commits into from
Apr 14, 2020
Merged

bpo-40221: Update ForkAwareThreadLock to use _at_fork_reinit #19477

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
2e9b564
bpo-40221: Update ForkAwareThreadLock to use _at_fork_reinit
corona10 Apr 11, 2020
24c5e51
bpo-40221: Update
corona10 Apr 14, 2020
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions Lib/multiprocessing/util.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -367,13 +367,13 @@ def _exit_function(info=info, debug=debug, _run_finalizers=_run_finalizers,

class ForkAwareThreadLock(object):
def __init__(self):
self._reset()
register_after_fork(self, ForkAwareThreadLock._reset)

def _reset(self):
self._lock = threading.Lock()
self.acquire = self._lock.acquire
self.release = self._lock.release
register_after_fork(self, ForkAwareThreadLock._at_fork_reinit)

def _at_fork_reinit(self):
self._lock._at_fork_reinit()

def __enter__(self):
return self._lock.__enter__()
Expand Down
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions Misc/NEWS.d/next/Library/2020-04-12-02-46-29.bpo-40221.rQmSte.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
Update ForkAwareThreadLock to use _at_fork_reinit.

@vstinner vstinner Apr 13, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For such news entry, you should mention which module is modified. The user reading the NEWS entry has no idea, except maybe multiprocessing experts ;-)

For this specific change, honestly, I don't think that end users really care: I suggest to remove the NEWS entry. The change doesn't seem to fix any known crash, it's more a cleanup/refactoring.