std: allow Condvar to be used with multiple Mutexes
#148656
Open
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The documentation for
Condvar::waitcurrently states thatThis is however only true on UNIX platforms that still use the pthread
Condvarimplementation (namely macOS, some BSDs like NetBSDs and some very niche platforms like VxWorks), making it likely that users will not be aware of this caveat.Hence in this PR, I've modified the pthread-based implementation to allow multi-mutex-use by adding an inner mutex that bridges the gap between the unlock operation on the user-specified mutex and the actual condvar wait.
Note that this closes the door on making the futex-based
notify_all()a requeuing operation, as the waiters might not be sharing the same mutex. At the same time, the implementation change here makes it easier to switch theMuteximplementation independent of theCondvarone, which would e.g. simplify switching it to employos_unfair_lockon macOS.@rustbot label +I-libs-api-nominated