Let's say I have these two structs:
type A struct {
Mutex sync.Mutex
i int
}
type B struct {
A
sync.Mutex
}
Now, when I try to lock B
and then A
I got a deadlock:
var b B
b.Lock()
b.Mutex.Lock()
b.Mutex.Unlock()
b.Unlock()
I figured out that this is related with the name of the mutex of the struct A
, for example, there is no deadlock if I name it Mutexx
and not Mutex
. But I don't know why it matters. Can anyone, please, explain this behavior?
The reason for the deadlock is because your code will call the Lock()
method of the same mutex twice, which is a blocking operation.
The explanation lies in Spec: Selectors:
The following rules apply to selectors:
- For a value
x
of typeT
or*T
whereT
is not a pointer or interface type,x.f
denotes the field or method at the shallowest depth inT
where there is such anf
. If there is not exactly onef
with shallowest depth, the selector expression is illegal.
What does this mean?
In B
, you embed both a sync.Mutex
and a value of A
, and A
also embeds a sync.Mutex
.
When you write B.Mutex
, that could refer to the directly embedded B.Mutex
field (the unqualified type name acts as the field name), and could also refer to B.A.Mutex
(because the A
field is embedded in B
), but according to the quoted rule above, it will denote the field / method at the shallowest depth which is B.Mutex
.
Similarly, b.Lock()
could refer to B.Mutex.Lock()
and could refer to B.A.Mutex.Lock()
. But again according to the quoted rule, it will denote the field / method at the shallowest depth, which is B.Mutex.Lock()
.
So this code:
b.Lock()
b.Mutex.Lock()
Will call the Lock()
method of the same Mutex
twice, which is the embedded B.Mutex
field of the B
struct. The 2nd call will block, as the mutex is already locked.
When you rename A.Mutex
to e.g. A.Mutexx
, and then you write:
b.Lock()
b.Mutexx.Lock()
The first b.Lock()
call refers to B.Mutex.Lock()
, and the second b.Mutexx.Lock()
call refers to B.A.Mutexx.Lock()
call, so they lock 2 different, distinct mutexes; they are independent, so the 2nd lock will not block (its mutex is not yet locked).