Use RLock in Demoted method for read-only access to expiry

[1911860538]

Use RLock in Demoted method to improve read-only access to expiry with better concurrency.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @1911860538. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a etcd-io member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[ahrtr]

/ok-to-test

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.80%. Comparing base (eb7607b) to head (e10f01e).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
server/lease/lease.go	96.22% <100.00%> (-3.78%)	⬇️

... and 15 files with indirect coverage changes

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #19432      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.89%   68.80%   -0.09%     
==========================================
  Files         420      420              
  Lines       35753    35753              
==========================================
- Hits        24632    24601      -31     
- Misses       9698     9717      +19     
- Partials     1423     1435      +12     

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update eb7607b...e10f01e. Read the comment docs.

[ahrtr]

LGTM

Thanks for the catch.

[1911860538]

LGTM

Thanks for the catch.

My pleasure.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: 1911860538, ahrtr, serathius

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [ahrtr,serathius]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[ahrtr]

/cherry-pick release-3.6

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@ahrtr: new pull request created: #19443

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-3.6

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[ahrtr]

/cherry-pick release-3.5

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@ahrtr: #19432 failed to apply on top of branch "release-3.5":

Applying: perf: use RLock in Demoted method for read-only access to expiry
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
A	server/lease/lease.go
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
CONFLICT (modify/delete): server/lease/lease.go deleted in HEAD and modified in perf: use RLock in Demoted method for read-only access to expiry. Version perf: use RLock in Demoted method for read-only access to expiry of server/lease/lease.go left in tree.
error: Failed to merge in the changes.
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
hint: When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
hint: If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
hint: To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
hint: Disable this message with "git config advice.mergeConflict false"
Patch failed at 0001 perf: use RLock in Demoted method for read-only access to expiry

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-3.5

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[ahrtr]

@1911860538 could you please backport this minor fix to 3.5 as well?

[1911860538]

@1911860538 could you please backport this minor fix to 3.5 as well?

ok

[1911860538]

@1911860538 could you please backport this minor fix to 3.5 as well?

#19445
I have created a new pull request.

[ahrtr]

@1911860538 could you please backport this minor fix to 3.5 as well?

#19445 I have created a new pull request.

Thank you!