httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <b...@wstoddard.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/modules/experimental mod_cache.h mod_mem_cache.c
Date Mon, 18 Mar 2002 13:23:39 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cliff Woolley" <jwoolley@virginia.edu>
To: "Bill Stoddard" <bill@wstoddard.com>
Cc: <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:41 AM
Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/modules/experimental mod_cache.h mod_mem_cache.c


> On 18 Mar 2002 jwoolley@apache.org wrote:
>
> > jwoolley    02/03/17 22:37:33
> >
> >   Modified:    modules/experimental mod_cache.h mod_mem_cache.c
> >   Log:
> >   Get mod_mem_cache to compile cleanly again on linux, where apr_atomic_t
> >   is a struct.
>
> Hey Bill...
>
>    Do me a favor and look over this (ie, please make sure it still works
> on Windows :).  It's a bit ugly, but it was necessary to get it to compile
> cleanly.  There were a few cases where I couldn't tell how it was that the
> !USE_ATOMICS case was actually working right... how long has it been since
> somebody tried it with that turned off?  Just curious.  But anyway, why
> do we need a special !USE_ATOMICS case?  We have a default implementation
> of apr_atomic_* that uses locks to do its thing... are we just trying to
> avoid the extra locking overhead?
>
> PS: the (void) cast on the two calls to apr_atomic_dec() was needed to
> get rid of a compiler warning saying that a value computed was never used.
>
> Thanks,
> --Cliff

mod_mem_cache is experimental.  So are the apr_atomic_* calls. Feel free to remove the
!USE_ATOMICS code paths when the apr_atomic functions are reasonably stable. Will review a
bit later today.

Bill


Mime
View raw message