apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apr/locks/os2 thread_mutex.c
Date Wed, 17 Oct 2001 01:31:46 GMT
On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 01:14:52AM -0000, bjh@apache.org wrote:
> bjh         01/10/16 18:14:52
> 
>   Modified:    locks/os2 thread_mutex.c
>   Log:
>   Remove FIXME comment. Yes, OS/2 native locks support nesting.
>   
>   Revision  Changes    Path
>   1.5       +0 -1      apr/locks/os2/thread_mutex.c
>   
>   Index: thread_mutex.c
>   ===================================================================
>   RCS file: /home/cvs/apr/locks/os2/thread_mutex.c,v
>   retrieving revision 1.4
>   retrieving revision 1.5
>   diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5
>   --- thread_mutex.c	2001/10/17 00:33:00	1.4
>   +++ thread_mutex.c	2001/10/17 01:14:52	1.5
>   @@ -79,7 +79,6 @@
>        new_mutex = (apr_thread_mutex_t *)apr_palloc(pool, sizeof(apr_thread_mutex_t));
>        new_mutex->pool = pool;
>    
>   -    /* FIXME: Can OS/2 do nested (aka recursive) locks natively? */
>        rc = DosCreateMutexSem(NULL, &(new_mutex->hMutex), 0, FALSE);
>        *mutex = new_mutex;

Sorry, my comment was totally unclear and misleading. I meant to say:

OS/2 needs to optionally support nested locks depending on if
(flags & APR_THREAD_MUTEX_NESTED) is true. Same goes for the other
platforms -- Unix is taken care of.

I guess we'd have to ask the converse: Can OS/2 support non-nested locks?

-aaron

Mime
View raw message