Skip to content

Conversation

@fufuok
Copy link
Contributor

@fufuok fufuok commented Dec 27, 2025

Follow up #374

Instead of adding this p.addRunning(1) and removing p.addRunning(-1) from all worker implementations. Can we just simply move p.lock.Unlock() underneath w.run()?

yes. great.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 27, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.16%. Comparing base (df029e6) to head (03342e0).
⚠️ Report is 14 commits behind head on dev.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #376      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   89.95%   94.16%   +4.21%     
==========================================
  Files          11       14       +3     
  Lines        1005      788     -217     
==========================================
- Hits          904      742     -162     
+ Misses         76       34      -42     
+ Partials       25       12      -13     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 94.16% <100.00%> (+4.21%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copy link
Owner

@panjf2000 panjf2000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@panjf2000 panjf2000 merged commit e954908 into panjf2000:dev Dec 27, 2025
13 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants