hardcoresushi/libcryfs
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Activity

Added ParallelAccessStore::isOpened()

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Sebastian Messmer 2015-10-14 15:01:52 +02:00
parent cc2f93af92
commit 5453627209
1 changed files with 20 additions and 7 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

25
ParallelAccessStore.h
View File

@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ public:
Key _key;
};
bool isOpened(const Key &key) const;
cpputils::unique_ref<ResourceRef> add(const Key &key, cpputils::unique_ref<Resource> resource);
template<class ActualResourceRef>
cpputils::unique_ref<ActualResourceRef> add(const Key &key, cpputils::unique_ref<Resource> resource, std::function<cpputils::unique_ref<ActualResourceRef>(Resource*)> createResourceRef);
@ -77,7 +78,7 @@ private:
uint32_t _refCount;
};
std::mutex _mutex;
mutable std::mutex _mutex;
cpputils::unique_ref<ParallelAccessBaseStore<Resource, Key>> _baseStore;
std::unordered_map<Key, OpenResource> _openResources;
@ -101,6 +102,12 @@ ParallelAccessStore<Resource, ResourceRef, Key>::ParallelAccessStore(cpputils::u
static_assert(std::is_base_of<ResourceRefBase, ResourceRef>::value, "ResourceRef must inherit from ResourceRefBase");
}
template<class Resource, class ResourceRef, class Key>
bool ParallelAccessStore<Resource, ResourceRef, Key>::isOpened(const Key &key) const {
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(_mutex);
return _openResources.find(key) != _openResources.end();
};
template<class Resource, class ResourceRef, class Key>
cpputils::unique_ref<ResourceRef> ParallelAccessStore<Resource, ResourceRef, Key>::add(const Key &key, cpputils::unique_ref<Resource> resource) {
return add<ResourceRef>(key, std::move(resource), [] (Resource *resource) {
@ -121,7 +128,7 @@ template<class ActualResourceRef>
cpputils::unique_ref<ActualResourceRef> ParallelAccessStore<Resource, ResourceRef, Key>::_add(const Key &key, cpputils::unique_ref<Resource> resource, std::function<cpputils::unique_ref<ActualResourceRef>(Resource*)> createResourceRef) {
static_assert(std::is_base_of<ResourceRef, ActualResourceRef>::value, "Wrong ResourceRef type");
auto insertResult = _openResources.emplace(key, std::move(resource));
ASSERT(true == insertResult.second, "Inserting failed");
ASSERT(true == insertResult.second, "Inserting failed. Already exists.");
auto resourceRef = createResourceRef(insertResult.first->second.getReference());
resourceRef->init(this, key);
return resourceRef;
@ -136,7 +143,7 @@ boost::optional<cpputils::unique_ref<ResourceRef>> ParallelAccessStore<Resource,
template<class Resource, class ResourceRef, class Key>
boost::optional<cpputils::unique_ref<ResourceRef>> ParallelAccessStore<Resource, ResourceRef, Key>::load(const Key &key, std::function<cpputils::unique_ref<ResourceRef>(Resource*)> createResourceRef) {
//TODO This lock doesn't allow loading different blocks in parallel. Can we do something with futures maybe?
//TODO This lock doesn't allow loading different blocks in parallel. Can we only lock the requested key?
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(_mutex);
auto found = _openResources.find(key);
if (found == _openResources.end()) {
@ -154,12 +161,18 @@ boost::optional<cpputils::unique_ref<ResourceRef>> ParallelAccessStore<Resource,
template<class Resource, class ResourceRef, class Key>
void ParallelAccessStore<Resource, ResourceRef, Key>::remove(const Key &key, cpputils::unique_ref<ResourceRef> resource) {
auto insertResult = _resourcesToRemove.emplace(key, std::promise<cpputils::unique_ref<Resource>>());
std::future<cpputils::unique_ref<Resource>> resourceToRemoveFuture;
{
std::lock_guard <std::mutex> lock(_mutex); // TODO Lock needed for _resourcesToRemove?
auto insertResult = _resourcesToRemove.emplace(key, std::promise < cpputils::unique_ref < Resource >> ());
ASSERT(true == insertResult.second, "Inserting failed");
resourceToRemoveFuture = insertResult.first->second.get_future();
}
cpputils::destruct(std::move(resource));
//Wait for last resource user to release it
auto resourceToRemove = insertResult.first->second.get_future().get();
auto resourceToRemove = resourceToRemoveFuture.get();
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(_mutex); // TODO Just added this as a precaution on a whim, but I seriously need to rethink locking here.
_resourcesToRemove.erase(key); //TODO Is this erase causing a race condition?
_baseStore->removeFromBaseStore(std::move(resourceToRemove));