fix(HandleIDPInitiated): Remove recursive rlock #631
Conversation
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
There is a recursive RLock in the path `HandleIDPInitiated` -> `ServeIDPInitiated` -> `GetServiceProvider`. This can lead to deadlocks under concurrent requests. The outer RLock is unnecessary, because `GetServiceProvider` is the only call to access the protected `serviceProviders` map, and it already guards acces with RLock. For further context from a similar issue, see: 91716e8
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There is a recursive RLock in the path
HandleIDPInitiated->ServeIDPInitiated->GetServiceProvider. This can lead to deadlocks under concurrent requests. The outer RLock is unnecessary, becauseGetServiceProvideris the only call to access the protectedserviceProvidersmap, and it already guards access with RLock.For further context from a similar issue, see:
clerk@91716e8
A similar fix for a different recursive rlock was already merged into upstream here: #553