Fix incorrect ProGuard rules that allowed shrinking volatile felds

Fixes #1564
Kotlin · Dec 10, 2020 · c6fa14f · c6fa14f
1 parent 1176267
commit c6fa14f
Show file tree

Hide file tree

Showing 2 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions.
diff --git a/kotlinx-coroutines-core/jvm/resources/META-INF/proguard/coroutines.pro b/kotlinx-coroutines-core/jvm/resources/META-INF/proguard/coroutines.pro
@@ -3,12 +3,12 @@
 -keepnames class kotlinx.coroutines.CoroutineExceptionHandler {}
 
 # Most of volatile fields are updated with AFU and should not be mangled
--keepclassmembernames class kotlinx.** {
+-keepclassmembers class kotlinx.** {
     volatile <fields>;
 }
 
 # Same story for the standard library's SafeContinuation that also uses AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater
--keepclassmembernames class kotlin.coroutines.SafeContinuation {
+-keepclassmembers class kotlin.coroutines.SafeContinuation {
     volatile <fields>;
 }
 

diff --git a/kotlinx-coroutines-test/resources/META-INF/proguard/coroutines.pro b/kotlinx-coroutines-test/resources/META-INF/proguard/coroutines.pro
@@ -4,6 +4,6 @@
 -keepnames class kotlinx.coroutines.android.AndroidDispatcherFactory {}
 
 # Most of volatile fields are updated with AFU and should not be mangled
--keepclassmembernames class kotlinx.** {
+-keepclassmembers class kotlinx.** {
     volatile <fields>;
 }