refactor(lock): simplify acquired lock tracking#62374
Open
joshtrichards wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
Document the tracked lock state, remove redundant inherited documentation, and simplify shared and exclusive lock bookkeeping. Signed-off-by: Josh <josh.t.richards@gmail.com>
joshtrichards
requested review from
Altahrim,
come-nc,
icewind1991 and
leftybournes
and removed request for
a team
July 21, 2026 19:49
For use by providers Signed-off-by: Josh <josh.t.richards@gmail.com>
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
The existing provider tests provide reasonable indirect coverage of this bookkeeping.
Follow-up
This does not validate lock types at the provider boundaries.
DBLockingProvider::acquireLock()andMemcacheLockingProvider::acquireLock()still treat any non-shared value as exclusive and an invalid valuecan still flow through (though it will no longer be treated one way in
markChange()and another bymarkAcquire()). This is already invalid per the contract, and can be addressed separately in the two provider implementations.TODO
Checklist
3. to review, feature component)stable32)AI (if applicable)