From dev-return-14290-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Fri Jun 03 06:06:15 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42392 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2005 06:06:15 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2005 06:06:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 30856 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jun 2005 06:06:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 30794 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jun 2005 06:06:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 30750 invoked by uid 99); 3 Jun 2005 06:06:10 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net (HELO rwcrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.198.39) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Jun 2005 23:06:08 -0700 Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-24-6-11-151.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[24.6.11.151]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with ESMTP id <2005060306055701500976nse>; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 06:05:57 +0000 Received: from [192.168.123.1] (helo=localhost) by localhost.localdomain with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1De5Jd-0002jF-JZ for dev@apr.apache.org; Thu, 02 Jun 2005 23:05:57 -0700 Subject: [patch] Deadlock in apr_thread_cond_wait on WIN32 platform [BugID 27654, 34336] From: Henry Jen To: dev@apr.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Zc0ccxlPojBebAWU05lW" Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 23:05:20 -0700 Message-Id: <1117778720.6961.17.camel@hammerhead.sfbay.sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N --=-Zc0ccxlPojBebAWU05lW Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, We encountered the issue as reported in Bug 27654(http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D27654), too bad I did not check the issue database earlier until I figured it out after 3 days. The patch in the issues database should be working, is there a reason for not committing it? Anyway, I have created another patch(see attachment) to address the same issue and which would also fix bug 34336 as it totally removing the cond->mutex. I believe using the mutex passed in to ensure mutual access should be sufficient. Unless the different threads can use different mutex for the same cond, but I don't see that as a valid usage and nor can I think of a use case for that. Please review it, comments are welcome. I would like to see the patch be committed to head and also back port to 0.9.x release. The patch had been tested for both apr-0.9.6 and SVN trunk with 'patch -Np0' in the apr folder. =20 Cheers, --=20 Henry Jen aka slowhog http://blogs.sun.com/slowhog --=-Zc0ccxlPojBebAWU05lW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCn/MeLNaoAyBG0PURAkl9AJ9YJ+7TWpC2qi+H3tskof8ubfArSwCeJEaT 9pGaLiYfIq/kDXbnmXaSiQk= =8t79 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Zc0ccxlPojBebAWU05lW--