httpd-bugs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 37100] - SEGV in mod_proxy_ajp
Date Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:21:54 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37100>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37100


william.barker@wilshire.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tomcat-
                   |                            |dev@jakarta.apache.org




------- Additional Comments From william.barker@wilshire.com  2005-10-20 22:21 -------

> Sorry, but you are confusing me. I guess you mean ((ajp_msg_t *)conn->data)-
>buf
> instead of conn->data->buffer. ((ajp_msg_t *)conn->data)->buf gets allocated

out
> of the request pool. This pool and thus the buffer remain valid for the 
livetime
> of the request. In line 212 conn->data is set to NULL. As we only use

My bad.  I didn't read the warning about the style-cleanup until too late, 
tried to fix the patch by hand, and didn't do a good job :(.  Getting a nice, 
pretty, new copy of httpd and applying the patch works very well.

> I admit it is a bandaid until we have an improved protocol. The questions are
> - Can we live with this bandaid
> - When do we get the protocol update

Well, Mladen wants to get started on mod_jk-1.3, so it seems like a good time.
> > It wouldn't be that hard 
> > to add a CMD_AJP13_FLUSH to Tomcat (with a Tomcat configuration option to 
turn 
> > it off so it doesn't freak-out mod_jk :).  But as Will says, that 
discussion 
> > belongs on dev@tomcat.
> > 
> Yes, this belongs to dev@tomcat. Are you willing to introduce this 
discussion to 
> dev@tomcat? That would be very nice. On the other hand from my personal 
point of
> view I do not think that it is a good idea to extend the Tomcat connectors in
> this way without having this in a spec of an AJP protocol whatever version it
> has. This would subvert the AJP spec.

Adding dev@tomcat to the CC list to start a discussion :).

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org


Mime
View raw message