aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorCory Fields <cory-nospam-@coryfields.com>2016-01-05 16:10:13 -0500
committerCory Fields <cory-nospam-@coryfields.com>2016-01-05 17:17:29 -0500
commit89f71c68c0fecf63059f6055ebdd25f1eba4c982 (patch)
tree14c1527701d1c08170678d50757aee2e875ef4ab /src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp
parent76ac35f36d87078da62f95b4a1167ec296e37363 (diff)
c++11: don't throw from the reverselock destructor
noexcept is default for destructors as of c++11. By throwing in reverselock's destructor if it's lock has been tampered with, the likely result is std::terminate being called. Indeed that happened before this change. Once reverselock has taken another lock (its ctor didn't throw), it makes no sense to try to grab or lock the parent lock. That is be broken/undefined behavior depending on the parent lock's implementation, but it shouldn't cause the reverselock to fail to re-lock when destroyed. To avoid those problems, simply swap the parent lock's contents with a dummy for the duration of the lock. That will ensure that any undefined behavior is caught at the call-site rather than the reverse lock's destruction. Barring a failed mutex unlock which would be indicative of a larger problem, the destructor should now never throw.
Diffstat (limited to 'src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp')
-rw-r--r--src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp16
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 10 deletions
diff --git a/src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp b/src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp
index e7e627ae0f..8bdff97000 100644
--- a/src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp
+++ b/src/test/reverselock_tests.cpp
@@ -42,22 +42,18 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(reverselock_errors)
BOOST_CHECK(failed);
BOOST_CHECK(!lock.owns_lock());
- // Make sure trying to lock a lock after it has been reverse locked fails
- failed = false;
- bool locked = false;
+ // Locking the original lock after it has been taken by a reverse lock
+ // makes no sense. Ensure that the original lock no longer owns the lock
+ // after giving it to a reverse one.
lock.lock();
BOOST_CHECK(lock.owns_lock());
-
- try {
+ {
reverse_lock<boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> > rlock(lock);
- lock.lock();
- locked = true;
- } catch(...) {
- failed = true;
+ BOOST_CHECK(!lock.owns_lock());
}
- BOOST_CHECK(locked && failed);
+ BOOST_CHECK(failed);
BOOST_CHECK(lock.owns_lock());
}