Add documentation for async_rw_mutex
#1356
Conversation
Coverage summary from CodacySee diff coverage on Codacy
Coverage variation details
Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: Diff coverage details
Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: See your quality gate settings Change summary preferencesCodacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more |
libs/pika/synchronization/include/pika/synchronization/async_rw_mutex.hpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
msimberg
force-pushed
the
async-rw-mutex-documentation
branch
from
cd89684
to
66173a7
Compare
| // Start and wait for all the work to finish. | ||
| tt::sync_wait(ex::when_all(std::move(rw_access1), std::move(ro_access1), | ||
| std::move(ro_access2), std::move(ro_access3), | ||
| std::move(rw_access2))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: in principle, given that DAG, can we sync_wait just the last readwrite access?
My doubt is this one. They do not depend on each other as sender, but the mutex implicitly creates a dependency. This "difference" (if it is a difference, or is it just conceptual?) requires that we start each sender independently, or we can just sync_wait the last one and all the chain is started as if they were actually dependent?
Part of #49.
Will likely conflict with #1355, so let's get that in first.