curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From dragonsinth <...@git.apache.org>
Subject [GitHub] curator pull request: CURATOR-126: Fix race condition in CuratorFr...
Date Mon, 28 Jul 2014 19:56:17 GMT
Github user dragonsinth commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/curator/pull/23#discussion_r15486219
  
    --- Diff: curator-framework/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/imps/CuratorFrameworkImpl.java
---
    @@ -770,9 +769,8 @@ private void backgroundOperationsLoop()
                         debugListener.listen(operationAndData);
                     }
                 }
    -            catch ( InterruptedException e )
    +            catch ( InterruptedException ignored )
                 {
    -                Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
    --- End diff --
    
    Let me be more clear.  The way the loop is constructed:
    
    ```
        private void backgroundOperationsLoop()
        {
            while ( !Thread.interrupted() )
            { ... }
    ```
    ALREADY eats the interrupted status.  Simply checking `Thread.interrupted()` consumes
it.  If you want to consistently enforce a rule that you always re-interrupt threads (which
is a good rule in general, although not necessary here) then you need an unconditional re-interrupt
at the end of the method.
    
    Do you want me to add that?
    
    My point is that putting the interrupt only in the catch block is inconsistent.  It re-interrupts
in the case where an InterruptedException gets throws, and fails to re-interrupt when the
loop exits without exception.



---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastructure@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Mime
View raw message