apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject [PATCH] Revised Win32 thread_mutex options
Date Wed, 29 May 2002 16:45:02 GMT
The attached patch introduces an unnested Win32 Event-based thread_mutex
that is compatible with the assumption that a single thread may obtain a lock
for another thread, then wait for the second thread to release it.

It further degrades to Mutex objects for nested Win9x locks, since we couldn't
'try' a thread_mutex based on CriticalSection objects before Windows NT.

I also attached a simple patch to illustrate the fix to mod_isapi with the
change to the API.  Hoping Sebastian could take a look as well.

If I don't hear objections, I'll commit later this afternoon.  Comments 


At 10:19 AM 5/29/2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>Attached is a patch to introduce a new locking semantic to our thread_mutex.
>Right now we presume the 'default' is unnested.  Well, that saves 30% of the
>processing time on Unix, but it would cripple Win32 (which gets a critical 
>in 10 instructions or so IF there is no contention... and it's always 
>Sebastian tossed me a really interesting and invalid assumption I made
>when apr'izing mod_isapi...
>At 09:38 AM 5/25/2002, Sebastian Hantsch wrote to me:
>>[...] the current Async emulation won't work as designed:
>>This is a snippet from isapi_handler:
>>comp = cid->completed;
>>if (cid->completed && (rv == APR_SUCCESS)) {
>>        rv = apr_thread_mutex_lock(comp);
>>/* The completion port is now locked.  When we regain the
>>* lock, we may destroy the request.
>>if (cid->completed && (rv == APR_SUCCESS)) {
>>        rv = apr_thread_mutex_lock(comp);
>>apr_thread_mutex functions internally use Critical Sections on win32 
>>In the Win32 SDK at
>>is the following statement:
>> > After a thread has ownership of a critical section, it can make 
>> additional calls to
>> > EnterCriticalSection or TryEnterCriticalSection without blocking its 
>> execution. This
>> > prevents a thread from deadlocking itself while waiting for a critical 
>> section that it already owns.
>>So, the method currently used in mod_isapi.c does not block as supposed 
>>until a HSE_REQ_DONE_WITH_SESSION message arrives.
>>I would suggest to use SetEvent/CreateEvent/WaitForSingleObject as in 
>>2.0.36, that synchronization methods work for me.

View raw message