Separate AccountLocks + Refactor #2390
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
apfitzge
commented
Aug 1, 2024
Comment on lines
-564
to
-592
| fn lock_account<'a>( | ||
| &self, | ||
| account_locks: &mut AccountLocks, | ||
| keys: impl Iterator<Item = (&'a Pubkey, bool)> + Clone, | ||
| ) -> Result<()> { | ||
| for (k, writable) in keys.clone() { | ||
| if writable { | ||
| if account_locks.is_locked_write(k) || account_locks.is_locked_readonly(k) { | ||
| debug!("Writable account in use: {:?}", k); | ||
| return Err(TransactionError::AccountInUse); | ||
| } | ||
| } else if account_locks.is_locked_write(k) { | ||
| debug!("Read-only account in use: {:?}", k); | ||
| return Err(TransactionError::AccountInUse); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| for (k, writable) in keys { | ||
| if writable { | ||
| account_locks.write_locks.insert(*k); | ||
| } else if !account_locks.lock_readonly(k) { | ||
| account_locks.insert_new_readonly(k); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| Ok(()) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn unlock_account<'a>( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these functions used to be on Accounts but don't even use self.
They are no on the AccountLocks struct directly.
|
Separating this out and making fields non-pub makes a follow-up change to use a single map simpler. |
apfitzge
changed the title
tao-stones
reviewed
Aug 1, 2024
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn lock_readonly(&mut self, key: &Pubkey) { | ||
| *self.readonly_locks.entry(*key).or_default() += 1; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is much better than if !lock_readonly() then insert_new_readonly() 🎉
accounts-db/src/account_locks.rs
Outdated
| for (key, writable) in keys.clone() { | ||
| if writable { | ||
| if !self.can_write_lock(key) { | ||
| debug!("Writable account in use: {:?}", key); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: maybe remove this debug line, doubt it is monitored at all.
accounts-db/src/account_locks.rs
Outdated
| /// The bool in the tuple indicates if the account is writable. | ||
| /// Returns an error if any of the accounts are already locked in a way | ||
| /// that conflicts with the requested lock. | ||
| pub fn try_lock_accounts_for_transaction<'a>( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nitpick on naming: the function say do something "_for_transaction", but there is no transaction in parameter list, only account keys. So maybe just "try_lock_accounts()"?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Problem
AccountLocksstructure and functionalitySummary of Changes
AccountLocksto its' own moduleFixes #