GH-96071: fix deadlock in PyGILState_Ensure #96124
Conversation
ca92ae3 to
3d9dc83
Compare
|
Nice, now that we have both, which one do you prefer in terms of maintainability? (Is ok if you like the other one more) I personally like this one a bit more because I can reason easier about re-entrancy and concurrency |
|
@pablogsal Let's go with this one. I agree this is easier to understand than the other one. |
ericsnowcurrently
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM (with one minor adjustment to a comment)
|
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated. Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase |
Co-authored-by: Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com>
|
Thanks @kumaraditya303 for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.11. |
Alternative of pythonGH-96107 (cherry picked from commit e0d54a4) Co-authored-by: Kumar Aditya <59607654+kumaraditya303@users.noreply.github.com>
|
GH-96129 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch. |
Alternative of #96107
Automerge-Triggered-By: GH:ericsnowcurrently