apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Pollset: Thread Safe & More
Date Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:15:29 GMT
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 09:08:59AM -0600, Paul Querna wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-09-23 at 11:38 +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
> > So I'm worried this patch is really solving the problem in the wrong
> > place.  The thing you are exporting here in the APR API, "is the
> > apr_pollset_* interface thread-safe in _add and _remove", seems really
> > horrible.  Either an API is thread-safe, or it isn't.  Making that a
> > *per-platform* flag seems like really bad design.
> 
> I agree with your conclusion here.  It isn't a good design to have
> platform specific properties like thread safety.

I suppose it wouldn't be so bad if this was enabled as flag passed to
apr_pollset_create (which already has a convenient flags parameter,
kudos to whomever for the forward thinking there).

apr_pollset_create(,,,APR_POLLSET_THREADSAFE)

which gives ENOTIMPL for non-kqueue/epoll implementations, and the mutex
locking is only used if it *is* specified.

> Part of my goal was to avoid using KQueue/EPoll directly in the Event
> MPM, and to keep it using the APR Generic Functions.  I think that I
> will just make an ap_ex_pollset_* set of functions to wrap EPoll/KQueue
> and include them directly in the Event MPM.

It does seem a shame to duplicate so much of this stuff...

joe

Mime
View raw message