AMDG Ken Savela wrote:

In other words, should the following code result in a deadlock?

#include <iostream>

#include

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { boost::shared_mutex smx;

boost::upgrade_lockboost::shared_mutex lock_one(smx); std::cout << "Locked once." << std::endl; std::cout.flush(); boost::upgrade_lockboost::shared_mutex lock_two(smx); std::cout << "Locked again." << std::endl; std::cout.flush(); boost::upgrade_to_unique_lockboost::shared_mutex lock_three(lock_two); std::cout << "Write lock." << std::endl;

return 0; }

This example illustrates the problem I'm having in my app -- I have a situation where a single thread may end up performing more than a single shared lock. When it does so, it hangs on the nested upgrade_lock. Is this the expected behavior?

Yes this is the expected behavior. When you try to upgrade the second shared lock it blocks until the other shared_lock is released. i.e. never. In Christ, Steven Watanabe