httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Ames <ames_g...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: one word syncronize once more
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:24:02 GMT
please see rev. 558039.  requests_this_child does not need to be 100% accurate.  the cure below
is worse than the disease.

Greg

----- Original Message ----
From: Dmytro Fedonin <Dmytro.Fedonin@Sun.COM>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 11:49:42 AM
Subject: one word syncronize once more

Hi all,

I've got some response which shows that I was not clear enough in my previous 
post. Fullproof solution would be:

Index: server/mpm/worker/worker.c
===================================================================
--- server/mpm/worker/worker.c  (revision 545597)
+++ server/mpm/worker/worker.c  (working copy)
@@ -892,7 +887,7 @@
          bucket_alloc = apr_bucket_alloc_create(ptrans);
          process_socket(ptrans, csd, process_slot, thread_slot, bucket_alloc);
          worker_sockets[thread_slot] = NULL;
-        requests_this_child--; /* FIXME: should be synchronized - aaron */
+        apr_atomic_dec32(&requests_this_child); /* much slower than important */
          apr_pool_clear(ptrans);
          last_ptrans = ptrans;
      }
Because we don't care about if (requests_this_child <= 0) it would be enough. But 
it is too way slow and is not so important.






       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware protection.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php

Mime
View raw message