Skip to content

[3.10] bpo-42540: reallocation of id_mutex should not force default allocator (GH-29564) #29599

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 17, 2021
Merged

[3.10] bpo-42540: reallocation of id_mutex should not force default allocator (GH-29564) #29599

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 17, 2021

Conversation

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

@miss-islington miss-islington commented Nov 17, 2021 •
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

Unlike the other locks reinitialized by _PyRuntimeState_ReInitThreads,
the "interpreters.main->id_mutex" is not freed by _PyRuntimeState_Fini
and should not force the default raw allocator.
(cherry picked from commit 736684b)

Co-authored-by: Sam Gross colesbury@gmail.com

https://bugs.python.org/issue42540
@colesbury @miss-islington
bpo-42540: reallocation of id_mutex should not force default allocator (
3510300 
pythonGH-29564) Unlike the other locks reinitialized by _PyRuntimeState_ReInitThreads, the "interpreters.main->id_mutex" is not freed by _PyRuntimeState_Fini and should not force the default raw allocator. (cherry picked from commit 736684b) Co-authored-by: Sam Gross <colesbury@gmail.com>
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

miss-islington commented Nov 17, 2021

@colesbury and @vstinner: Status check is done, and it's a success ✅ .
1 similar comment
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

miss-islington commented Nov 17, 2021

@colesbury and @vstinner: Status check is done, and it's a success ✅ .
@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot mentioned this pull request Nov 17, 2021
Merged
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

miss-islington commented Nov 17, 2021

@colesbury and @vstinner: Status check is done, and it's a success ✅ .
vstinner
vstinner approved these changes Nov 17, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@vstinner vstinner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, good bot.
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

miss-islington commented Nov 17, 2021

Sorry, I can't merge this PR. Reason: 3 of 6 required status checks are expected..
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor Author

miss-islington commented Nov 17, 2021

@colesbury and @vstinner: Status check is done, and it's a success ✅ .
@miss-islington miss-islington merged commit 1079b3e into python:3.10 Nov 17, 2021
@miss-islington miss-islington deleted the backport-736684b-3.10 branch November 17, 2021 21:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

5 participants

@miss-islington @vstinner @the-knights-who-say-ni @bedevere-bot @colesbury