From f402d9dbaa51f25c5f0117626818c12e5cde6687 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Zardosht Kasheff <zardosht@tokutek.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:59 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] closes #5272, address CR comments

git-svn-id: file:///svn/toku/tokudb@45930 c7de825b-a66e-492c-adef-691d508d4ae1
---
 ft/cachetable.cc       |  7 ++-----
 ft/kibbutz.h           |  6 ------
 ft/nonblocking_mutex.h |  5 ++---
 ft/rwlock.h            | 10 ++++++----
 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/ft/cachetable.cc b/ft/cachetable.cc
index f51fdf9551f..6dcd5dd6687 100644
--- a/ft/cachetable.cc
+++ b/ft/cachetable.cc
@@ -2518,6 +2518,7 @@ toku_cachetable_close (CACHETABLE *ctp) {
     toku_kibbutz_destroy(ct->checkpointing_kibbutz);
     bjm_destroy(ct->checkpoint_clones_bjm);
     toku_cond_destroy(&ct->flow_control_cond);
+    toku_mutex_destroy(&ct->mutex);
     toku_free(ct->table);
     toku_free(ct->env_dir);
     toku_free(ct);
@@ -2632,14 +2633,10 @@ int toku_cachetable_unpin_and_remove (
             // 
             cachetable_remove_pair(ct, p);
             if (nb_mutex_blocked_writers(&p->value_nb_mutex)>0) {
-                toku_cond_t cond;
-                toku_cond_init(&cond, NULL);
                 nb_mutex_wait_for_users(
                     &p->value_nb_mutex,
-                    &ct->mutex,
-                    &cond
+                    &ct->mutex
                     );
-                toku_cond_destroy(&cond);
                 assert(!p->checkpoint_pending);
                 assert(p->attr.cache_pressure_size == 0);
             }
diff --git a/ft/kibbutz.h b/ft/kibbutz.h
index fa7611bfbee..21e131de32e 100644
--- a/ft/kibbutz.h
+++ b/ft/kibbutz.h
@@ -8,12 +8,6 @@
 
 //
 // The kibbutz is another threadpool meant to do arbitrary work.
-// It is introduced in Dr. No, and as of Dr. No, the only work kibbutzim
-// do is flusher thread work. In Dr. No, we already have a threadpool for 
-// the writer threads and a threadpool for serializing ftnodes. A natural
-// question is why did we introduce another threadpool in Dr. No. The short
-// answer is that this was the simplest way to get the flusher threads work 
-// done.
 //
 
 typedef struct kibbutz *KIBBUTZ;
diff --git a/ft/nonblocking_mutex.h b/ft/nonblocking_mutex.h
index 114f84d146a..60be153728a 100644
--- a/ft/nonblocking_mutex.h
+++ b/ft/nonblocking_mutex.h
@@ -55,11 +55,10 @@ static inline void nb_mutex_unlock(NB_MUTEX nb_mutex) {
 
 static inline void nb_mutex_wait_for_users(
     NB_MUTEX nb_mutex, 
-    toku_mutex_t *mutex, 
-    toku_cond_t* cond
+    toku_mutex_t *mutex
     ) 
 {
-    rwlock_wait_for_users(&nb_mutex->lock, mutex, cond);
+    rwlock_wait_for_users(&nb_mutex->lock, mutex);
 }
 
 // returns: the number of writers who are waiting for the lock
diff --git a/ft/rwlock.h b/ft/rwlock.h
index 667b6c321b0..24ad8339dda 100644
--- a/ft/rwlock.h
+++ b/ft/rwlock.h
@@ -154,16 +154,18 @@ static inline int rwlock_writers(RWLOCK rwlock) {
 
 static inline void rwlock_wait_for_users(
     RWLOCK rwlock, 
-    toku_mutex_t *mutex, 
-    toku_cond_t* cond
+    toku_mutex_t *mutex
     ) 
 {
     assert(!rwlock->wait_users_go_to_zero);
+    toku_cond_t cond;
+    toku_cond_init(&cond, NULL);
     while (rwlock_users(rwlock) > 0) {
-        rwlock->wait_users_go_to_zero = cond;
-        toku_cond_wait(cond, mutex);
+        rwlock->wait_users_go_to_zero = &cond;
+        toku_cond_wait(&cond, mutex);
     }
     rwlock->wait_users_go_to_zero = NULL;
+    toku_cond_destroy(&cond);
 }