🐛 bug: Add Read Lock around app.Server() #3426
Conversation
WalkthroughThe Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Suggested reviewers
Poem
✨ Finishing Touches
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
app.go(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-13)
app.go
[failure] 965-965:
app.mutex.RUnlock undefined (type "sync".Mutex has no field or method RUnlock)
[failure] 964-964:
app.mutex.RLock undefined (type "sync".Mutex has no field or method RLock)
🪛 GitHub Check: unit (1.23.x, ubuntu-latest)
app.go
[failure] 965-965:
app.mutex.RUnlock undefined (type sync.Mutex has no field or method RUnlock)
[failure] 964-964:
app.mutex.RLock undefined (type sync.Mutex has no field or method RLock)
[failure] 965-965:
app.mutex.RUnlock undefined (type sync.Mutex has no field or method RUnlock)
[failure] 964-964:
app.mutex.RLock undefined (type sync.Mutex has no field or method RLock)
🪛 GitHub Check: govulncheck-check
app.go
[failure] 965-965:
app.mutex.RUnlock undefined (type "sync".Mutex has no field or method RUnlock)
[failure] 964-964:
app.mutex.RLock undefined (type "sync".Mutex has no field or method RLock)
🪛 GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, ubuntu-latest)
app.go
[failure] 965-965:
app.mutex.RUnlock undefined (type "sync".Mutex has no field or method RUnlock)
[failure] 964-964:
app.mutex.RLock undefined (type "sync".Mutex has no field or method RLock)
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
app.go
[failure] 965-965:
app.mutex.RUnlock undefined (type sync.Mutex has no field or method RUnlock) (typecheck)
[failure] 964-964:
app.mutex.RLock undefined (type sync.Mutex has no field or method RLock)
🪛 GitHub Actions: Run govulncheck
app.go
[error] 964-964: app.mutex.RLock undefined (type "sync".Mutex has no field or method RLock)
🪛 GitHub Actions: golangci-lint
app.go
[error] 964-964: golangci-lint: app.mutex.RLock undefined (type sync.Mutex has no field or method RLock)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (3)
- GitHub Check: repeated
- GitHub Check: Compare
- GitHub Check: Analyse
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
app.go(7 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
app.go
[failure] 903-903:
File is not properly formatted (gofmt)
🪛 GitHub Actions: golangci-lint
app.go
[error] 903-903: File is not properly formatted (gofmt)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (11)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, windows-latest)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-13)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, ubuntu-latest)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-latest)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.23.x, ubuntu-latest)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.23.x, windows-latest)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.23.x, macos-13)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.23.x, macos-latest)
- GitHub Check: repeated
- GitHub Check: Analyse
- GitHub Check: Compare
🔇 Additional comments (11)
app.go (11)
127-127: Good change: Using RWMutex for concurrent read access.Changing from
sync.Mutextosync.RWMutexis the correct approach since you want to allow multiple readers to access the app's state concurrently while ensuring that writers still have exclusive access.
635-637: Proper read locking for NewCtxFunc method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate. It allows concurrent reads while maintaining thread safety.
692-694: Proper read locking for GetRoute method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate and consistent with the read lock pattern.
708-710: Proper read locking for GetRoutes method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate and consistent with the read lock pattern.
894-896: Proper read locking for Config method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate and consistent with the read lock pattern.
915-917: Proper read locking for Stack method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate and consistent with the read lock pattern.
922-924: Proper read locking for HandlersCount method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate and consistent with the read lock pattern.
982-984: Proper read locking for Server method - main fix.This is the primary fix described in the PR objectives. Adding a read lock around
app.Server()is correct to address issue #3362 and prevent potential race conditions when reading server state.
989-991: Proper read locking for Hooks method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate and consistent with the read lock pattern.
996-998: Proper read locking for State method.Adding read lock around this getter method is appropriate and consistent with the read lock pattern.
656-662: Consistent use of write lock for mutations.This method correctly continues to use a write lock (Lock/Unlock) since it modifies internal state, while read-only methods use read locks. This shows a good understanding of the read-write mutex pattern.
|
Closing this for now, tests will never finish with the RWLock |
Description
app.Server()Fixes #3362