Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for defer_lock in nano::unique_lock #2909

Merged

Conversation

guilhermelawless
Copy link
Contributor

Needs NANO_TIMED_LOCKS CMake variable > 0 to test, otherwise it defaults to using std::unique_lock

This is necessary to build since #2901 but not caught by CI due to not using this developer-oriented feature

Needs NANO_TIMED_LOCKS CMake variable > 0 to test, otherwise it defaults
to using std::unique_lock

This is necessary to build since nanocurrency#2901 but not caught by CI due to not
using this developer-oriented feature
@guilhermelawless guilhermelawless added build-error debug Updates assisting with debugging and development efforts labels Sep 2, 2020
@guilhermelawless guilhermelawless added this to the V21.2 milestone Sep 2, 2020
@guilhermelawless guilhermelawless self-assigned this Sep 2, 2020
@guilhermelawless
Copy link
Contributor Author

Modified branch for a CI test here passed: https://github.com/guilhermelawless/nano-node/tree/ci/locks/defer-lock-test

@guilhermelawless guilhermelawless merged commit e091cd1 into nanocurrency:develop Sep 2, 2020
guilhermelawless added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 2, 2020
Needs NANO_TIMED_LOCKS CMake variable > 0 to test, otherwise it defaults
to using std::unique_lock

This is necessary to build since #2901 but not caught by CI due to not
using this developer-oriented feature
@guilhermelawless guilhermelawless deleted the locks/defer-lock branch September 8, 2020 11:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
build-error debug Updates assisting with debugging and development efforts
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants