apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bojan Smojver <bo...@rexursive.com>
Subject Re: Regarding apr_file_writev() and locking...
Date Sat, 12 May 2007 04:54:33 GMT
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 22:38 -0300, Davi Arnaut wrote:

> I've just posted a few initial patches to bugzilla, PR 42400. (passes
> testfile)

Thanks. I had a brief look through and they seem nice. I will test to

I see you switched the mutex to nested. I think I can then revert the
code for file_read_buffered() - the nested mutex would take care of that

The alternative approach would be to do apr_file_flush() in two parts -
public (with locking) and private (no locking). However, I have no idea
if nested mutex is greater overhead than another function call.

> I am in the middle of writing a patch that converts all file_io to
> standard i/o functions (stdio/streams) so we can remove all code
> involving buffering, file positioning and even locking at some cases. It
> saves a huge amount of code lines, and I hope, gives fewer bugs.
> Comments?

I would venture I guess that this would be trunk stuff only. But maybe
others feel something like that can go into 1.2.x/0.9.x.

Anyhow, I'm sure someone will point out the history of buffered code and
why a rewrite of stdio stuff happened in the fist place.


View raw message