Simplify descendantLockset access output, fix ambiguous history TID printing - #2123
Open
sim642 wants to merge 5 commits into
Open
Simplify descendantLockset access output, fix ambiguous history TID printing#2123sim642 wants to merge 5 commits into
sim642 wants to merge 5 commits into
Conversation
sim642
changed the title
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This simplifies access output of the descendantLockset analysis from #1913. See 793242c for the previous unwieldy output.
It adds names to the components (instead of the default
map) and omits subcomponents which are uninteresting (similarly toMHP). See individual commits for changes in output.It also fixes an old issue about ambiguous history TIDs being printed weirdly, especially in sets:
The set doesn't have two unique
mainthreads, although the old output looked like that.I came across this when looking for examples for #2061 in our existing tests.