<html>
<head>
<base href="http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW --- - Initialization (getILoggerFactory) is not thread safe"
href="http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/show_bug.cgi?id=176#c25">Comment # 25</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW --- - Initialization (getILoggerFactory) is not thread safe"
href="http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/show_bug.cgi?id=176">bug 176</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:bugzilla.slf4j.simon@arlott.org" title="Simon Arlott <bugzilla.slf4j.simon@arlott.org>"> <span class="fn">Simon Arlott</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=176#c24">comment #24</a>)
<span class="quote">> Created <span class=""><a href="attachment.cgi?id=101&action=diff" name="attach_101" title="Patch for thread-safety issues during binding">attachment 101</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=101&action=edit" title="Patch for thread-safety issues during binding">[details]</a></span>
> Patch for thread-safety issues during binding
>
> The patch uses the same test previously attached. The implementation is
> slightly different than the other patch. I don't think the reentrancy
> checking should be necessary, but I don't know if other bindings actually
> invoke this method again.</span >
<span class="quote">> // If re-entrant, return the temp factory</span >
You're making an assumption that it will be re-entrant using the same thread.
There is no guarantee that this is the case. The binding may be calling
arbitrary external code that blocks while it does some initialisation. This
initialisation may be performed with multiple threads in parallel, and one of
those threads may try to log something.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>