-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.3k
gh-128759: Fix accesses to tp_version_tag
.
#129750
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.
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
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
We should use a relaxed atomic load in the free threading build in `PyType_Modified()` because that's called without the type lock held. It's not necessary to use atomics in `type_modified_unlocked()`. We should also use `FT_ATOMIC_STORE_UINT_RELAXED()` instead of the `UINT32` variant because `tp_version_tag` is declared as `unsigned int`.
kumaraditya303
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2025
Thanks @colesbury for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.13. |
Sorry, @colesbury, I could not cleanly backport this to
|
colesbury
added a commit
to colesbury/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2025
…29750) We should use a relaxed atomic load in the free threading build in `PyType_Modified()` because that's called without the type lock held. It's not necessary to use atomics in `type_modified_unlocked()`. We should also use `FT_ATOMIC_STORE_UINT_RELAXED()` instead of the `UINT32` variant because `tp_version_tag` is declared as `unsigned int`. (cherry picked from commit 57f45ee) Co-authored-by: Sam Gross <[email protected]>
GH-130042 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.13 branch. |
colesbury
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2025
…30042) We should use a relaxed atomic load in the free threading build in `PyType_Modified()` because that's called without the type lock held. It's not necessary to use atomics in `type_modified_unlocked()`. We should also use `FT_ATOMIC_STORE_UINT_RELAXED()` instead of the `UINT32` variant because `tp_version_tag` is declared as `unsigned int`. (cherry picked from commit 57f45ee)
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.
We should use a relaxed atomic load in the free threading build in
PyType_Modified()
because that's called without the type lock held. It's not necessary to use atomics intype_modified_unlocked()
.We should also use
FT_ATOMIC_STORE_UINT_RELAXED()
instead of theUINT32
variant becausetp_version_tag
is declared asunsigned int
.