Improve documentation for file locking #136288
Merged
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
Add notes to each method stating that locks get dropped on close. Clarify the return values of the try methods: they're only defined if the lock is held via a *different* file handle/descriptor. That goes along with the documentation that calling them while holding a lock via the *same* file handle/descriptor may deadlock. Document the behavior of unlock if no lock is held.
joshtriplett
added
the
T-libs-api
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
3 tasks
|
@bors r+ rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 30, 2025
…iaskrgr Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#135026 (Cast global variables to default address space) - rust-lang#135475 (uefi: Implement path) - rust-lang#135852 (Add `AsyncFn*` to `core` prelude) - rust-lang#136004 (tests: Skip const OOM tests on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) - rust-lang#136157 (override build profile for bootstrap tests) - rust-lang#136180 (Introduce a wrapper for "typed valtrees" and properly check the type before extracting the value) - rust-lang#136256 (Add release notes for 1.84.1) - rust-lang#136271 (Remove minor future footgun in `impl Debug for MaybeUninit`) - rust-lang#136288 (Improve documentation for file locking) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 31, 2025
Rollup merge of rust-lang#136288 - joshtriplett:would-you-could-you-with-some-locks--would-you-could-you-in-some-docs, r=m-ou-se Improve documentation for file locking Add notes to each method stating that locks get dropped on close. Clarify the return values of the try methods: they're only defined if the lock is held via a *different* file handle/descriptor. That goes along with the documentation that calling them while holding a lock via the *same* file handle/descriptor may deadlock. Document the behavior of unlock if no lock is held. r? `@m-ou-se` (Documentation changes requested in rust-lang#130994 .)
joshtriplett
deleted the
would-you-could-you-with-some-locks--would-you-could-you-in-some-docs
branch
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.
Add notes to each method stating that locks get dropped on close.
Clarify the return values of the try methods: they're only defined if
the lock is held via a different file handle/descriptor. That goes
along with the documentation that calling them while holding a lock via
the same file handle/descriptor may deadlock.
Document the behavior of unlock if no lock is held.
r? @m-ou-se
(Documentation changes requested in #130994 .)