httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From r..@covalent.net
Subject RE: cvs commit: apache-2.0/src/modules/standard mod_auth_digest.c
Date Fri, 02 Jun 2000 16:21:51 GMT

> > I'm with Ryan on this. The ap_shm_*() functions should be 
> > implemented on all platforms, in all configurations.

It's amazing, but that's not what I meant.  If you go back to my original
note about all of this, I simply pointed out that we had made a design
decision to get rid of all of these stub functions from APR only to have
them put back into functions.

The solution that I like best is to have the feature macro which the core
uses to implement a server_wide allocation function, using either palloc
or malloc or ap_shm_malloc depending on the context and MPM.

> I think it is a different thing to build in the feature set
> into APR than to require it under an MPM or other module.
> I like the idea of the MPM 'emulating' shared memory for
> thread-only storage, since the code is written _ONCE_ and if
> it is working under true shmem, it _will_ work under the
> MPM's simple ap_pmalloc/ap_pfree wrappers.
> 
> That's all I'm piping in... feel free to go return to your
> regularly scheduled debates :-)
> 
> But I have one question about ap_shm_ functions... do we have
> any implicit/explicit assumption that the memory in process A
> is at the same physical address as process B?  This is a HUGE
> question under Win32, and probably other hybrid kernels.

No, that assumption should never be made, because it simply isn't valid in
most shared memory implementations.  I believe Apache makes that
assumption (althought I could be wrong).  I am 99.999% sure that APR makes
no such assumption.

Ryan

_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Mime
View raw message