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

Move std::sys::{mutex, condvar, rwlock} to std::sys::locks. #95173

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 23, 2022

Conversation

m-ou-se
Copy link
Member

@m-ou-se m-ou-se commented Mar 21, 2022

This cleans up the the std::sys modules a bit by putting the locks in a single module called locks rather than spread over the three modules mutex, condvar, and rwlock. This makes it easier to organise lock implementations, which helps with #93740.

@m-ou-se m-ou-se added the T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Mar 21, 2022
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @dtolnay

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 21, 2022
@m-ou-se
Copy link
Member Author

m-ou-se commented Mar 21, 2022

Since this touches a lot of platform specific code:

@bors rollup=iffy

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@m-ou-se m-ou-se force-pushed the sys-locks-module branch 2 times, most recently from 66b978d to 724fd5a Compare March 21, 2022 15:22
@dtolnay
Copy link
Member

dtolnay commented Mar 21, 2022

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 21, 2022

📌 Commit 724fd5adae37c900812fa7b3a605a7f2fdde0939 has been approved by dtolnay

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 21, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 724fd5adae37c900812fa7b3a605a7f2fdde0939 with merge 25793f067828e33f969eca5702d804ea2220aa0a...

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2022

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Mar 22, 2022
@dtolnay
Copy link
Member

dtolnay commented Mar 22, 2022

@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 22, 2022
@m-ou-se
Copy link
Member Author

m-ou-se commented Mar 22, 2022

@bors r=dtolnay

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2022

📌 Commit 8ddb34d has been approved by dtolnay

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Mar 22, 2022
Dylan-DPC added a commit to Dylan-DPC/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 22, 2022
Move std::sys::{mutex, condvar, rwlock} to std::sys::locks.

This cleans up the the std::sys modules a bit by putting the locks in a single module called `locks` rather than spread over the three modules `mutex`, `condvar`, and `rwlock`. This makes it easier to organise lock implementations, which helps with rust-lang#93740.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 8ddb34d with merge 2cff93665efc8cdc2e63b40fc01f8a24b2e78fee...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2022

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Mar 22, 2022
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@dtolnay dtolnay added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 22, 2022
@m-ou-se
Copy link
Member Author

m-ou-se commented Mar 22, 2022

Third time's a charm? (:

@bors r=dtolnay

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 22, 2022

📌 Commit 733153f has been approved by dtolnay

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Mar 22, 2022
@Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member

@bors rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 23, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 733153f with merge 36748cf...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 23, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: dtolnay
Pushing 36748cf to master...

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (36748cf): comparison url.

Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant results.

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

@m-ou-se m-ou-se deleted the sys-locks-module branch March 23, 2022 09:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants