sessionLock: fix the check for locking a locked session #6843
Conversation
This file contains 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
DawfukFR
pushed a commit
to DawfukFR/Hyprland
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 12, 2024
PaideiaDilemma
added a commit
to PaideiaDilemma/Hyprland
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 25, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Describe your PR, what does it fix/add?
It fixes the following misbehavior:
When a client holds a locked session lock object and another client tries to lock the session as well, the second client will receive
finished. When the second client never callsdestroyorunlock_and_destroyit effectively blocks the user from locking the session, becausem_vLocksstill contains the lock object that was not destroyed.I think this is the correct behavior. Since
RESOURCE->inertis set wheneversendFinishedis called anyways, it should also be safe for the left over lock object to sendunlock_and_destroyat some point.Is there anything you want to mention? (unchecked code, possible bugs, found problems, breaking compatibility, etc.)
Please check if i am correct, but should be fine.
Is it ready for merging, or does it need work?
Ready.