apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Bannert <aa...@ebuilt.com>
Subject Re: Terminating threads in a process, WAS: RE: [PATCH] Problems with MPM threaded
Date Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:41:45 GMT
> > that would be registered in the "parent" thread's pool -- and would only
> > be invoked by the "parent" thread.
> > 
> > pools let you do this, you don't need the mutexes for it, you just have to
> > be explicit about parallelism.  (combine that with a root pool per thread
> > and then we can remove alloc_mutex and free lists and push the real gnarly
> > problems into the libc malloc where it's probably best solved.)
> Yes, yes, yes.  Can we please split the concept of a heirarchial parent (the
> 'creator' thread's or process pool, in this case) from the allocation parent
> (the actual give me memory for my pool from ... here!)  Then we have an 
> "OS Knows Best" malloc/free mpm for threading, just as you suggest.
> This solves your thread-specific requirements and our scoping issues, along
> with fixing the 'walk the chain of pools for a block' problem, both at once.

It's probably just me, but I'm having trouble parsing this (I think I'm
getting a cold :( ).

Are you saying you want the thread function to have access to both a
"scope" pool as well as an "allocator" pool, in case they are different?


View raw message