rls: Document RefCountedChildPolicyWrapperFactory as non-threadsafe #11124
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
Instead of having docs in RefCountedChildPolicyWrapperFactory saying
that every method was guarded by a lock, I added `@GuardedBy("lock")`
within CachingRlsLbClient, so now it is clearly not thread-safe and the
lock protects access. The AtomicLong was replaced with a long since
1) there was no multi-threading and 2) the logic was not atomic-safe
which was misleading.
larry-safran
approved these changes
Apr 25, 2024
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Instead of having docs in RefCountedChildPolicyWrapperFactory saying that every method was guarded by a lock, I added
@GuardedBy("lock")within CachingRlsLbClient, so now it is clearly not thread-safe and the lock protects access. The AtomicLong was replaced with a long since 1) there was no multi-threading and 2) the logic was not atomic-safe which was misleading.