From: Gregory P. Smith <greg@mad-scientist.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:16:47 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: use PyBUF_LOCK instead of PyBUF_SIMPLE for bsddb data access as it'll often
X-Git-Tag: v3.0a4~149
X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=c55485bc6d4a22026e12ccc6b772984059468a86;p=thirdparty%2FPython%2Fcpython.git

use PyBUF_LOCK instead of PyBUF_SIMPLE for bsddb data access as it'll often
be using the data buffer provided without the GIL held.
---

diff --git a/Modules/_bsddb.c b/Modules/_bsddb.c
index 52d83eca61a5..02973aab2df3 100644
--- a/Modules/_bsddb.c
+++ b/Modules/_bsddb.c
@@ -312,10 +312,9 @@ static Py_buffer * _malloc_view(PyObject *obj)
                         "Py_buffer malloc failed");
         return NULL;
     }
-    /* XXX(gps): PyBUF_LOCKDATA is desired to prevent other theads from
-       trashing the data buffer while we release the GIL during the db
-       operation.  see http://bugs.python.org/issue1035 */
-    if (PyObject_GetBuffer(obj, view, PyBUF_SIMPLE) == -1) {
+    /* We use PyBUF_LOCK to prevent other threads from trashing the data
+       buffer while we release the GIL.  http://bugs.python.org/issue1035 */
+    if (PyObject_GetBuffer(obj, view, PyBUF_LOCK) == -1) {
         PyMem_Free(view);
         return NULL;
     }