[svn] commit: r3577 - /branches/trac408/src/lib/nsas/tests/zone_entry_unittest.cc

[BIND 10 source code commits]

Author: vorner
Date: Sat Nov 20 16:57:10 2010
New Revision: 3577

Log:
Fix lock test

It could deadlock if the wrong thread started first

Modified:
    branches/trac408/src/lib/nsas/tests/zone_entry_unittest.cc

Modified: branches/trac408/src/lib/nsas/tests/zone_entry_unittest.cc
==============================================================================
--- branches/trac408/src/lib/nsas/tests/zone_entry_unittest.cc (original)
+++ branches/trac408/src/lib/nsas/tests/zone_entry_unittest.cc Sat Nov 20 16:57:10 2010
@@ -105,6 +105,8 @@
 void lockAndKeep(ZoneEntry* zone, bool* locked_self, bool* locked_other,
     barrier* when)
 {
+    // Wait for go signal
+    when->wait();
     // Lock
     ZoneEntry::Lock lock(zone->getLock());
     *locked_self = true;
@@ -144,9 +146,14 @@
     barrier both_second(2);
     bool l1(false), l2(false);
     thread t3(lockAndKeep, &z1, &l1, &l2, &both);
+    // Let this one run into the lock, not the other
+    both.wait();
     thread t4(lockAndKeep, &z2, &l2, &l1, &both_second);
+    // Let it start the loop
     both.wait();
-    // Make sure one of them is started
+    // Let this one run to the lock and wait on it
+    both_second.wait();
+    // Make sure the threads has time now
     for (int i(0); i < 100; ++ i) {
         this_thread::yield();
     }
@@ -156,9 +163,10 @@
 
     // Try it the other way around (so it does not depend on the order of nameservers
     thread t6(lockAndKeep, &z2, &l2, &l1, &both);
+    both.wait();
     thread t5(lockAndKeep, &z1, &l1, &l2, &both_second);
     both.wait();
-    // Make sure one of them is started
+    both_second.wait();
     for (int i(0); i < 100; ++ i) {
         this_thread::yield();
     }