httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com>
Subject Re: [patch] two small problems in ssl_engine_mutex.c
Date Mon, 31 Mar 2003 07:13:23 GMT
--On Monday, March 31, 2003 12:53 AM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr." 
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:

> One, win32 won't compile (nor any platform missing chown).  In this
> case we didn't need it and have a good macro to look at.

Yup.  Bad.  It'd never get executed on them, but how is the compiler to know?

> This raised another bug in the next line.  We assumed because we
> default to SYSV mutexes we should do that magic.  I believe this is
> wrong, and we should be looking for that sort of lock explicitly.

Yup.  But, as a stylistic nit, I'd prefer following what prefork.c:977 has 
instead.  So:

+ #if APR_HAS_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE
+    if (((mc->nMutexMech == APR_LOCK_DEFAULT) && APR_USE_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE)
+            || (mc->nMutexMech == APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM)) {

would be:

#if APR_HAS_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE
#if APR_USE_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE
    if (mc->nMutexMech == APR_LOCK_DEFAULT ||
        mc->nMutexMech == APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM) {
#else
    if (mc->nMutexMech == APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM) {
#endif
...

Take this for whatever it's worth.  Looks good.  +1.  -- justin

Mime
View raw message