httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group" <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com>
Subject RE: svn commit: r1162881 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2011 16:06:38 GMT
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Fritsch [mailto:sf@sfritsch.de] 
> Sent: Montag, 29. August 2011 18:00
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1162881 - 
> /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
> 
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, jim@apache.org wrote:
> 
> > Author: jim
> > Date: Mon Aug 29 15:53:52 2011
> > New Revision: 1162881
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1162881&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Allow for actual counting...
> >
> > Modified:
> >    httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
> >
> > Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
> > URL: 
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/module
> s/http/byterange_filter.c?rev=1162881&r1=1162880&r2=1162881&view=diff
> > 
> ==============================================================
> ================
> > --- 
> httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c (original)
> > +++ 
> httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c 
> Mon Aug 29 15:53:52 2011
> > @@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ static apr_status_t copy_brigade_range(a
> >             if (off_first != start64) {
> >                 rv = apr_bucket_split(copy, 
> (apr_size_t)(start64 - off_first));
> >                 if (rv == APR_ENOTIMPL) {
> > +                    int i;
> >                     rv = apr_bucket_read(copy, &s, &len, 
> APR_BLOCK_READ);
> >                     if (rv != APR_SUCCESS) {
> >                         apr_brigade_cleanup(bbout);
> > @@ -147,9 +148,10 @@ static apr_status_t copy_brigade_range(a
> >                      * of shorter length. So read and 
> delete until we reached
> >                      * the correct bucket for splitting.
> >                      */
> > +                    i = 0;
> >                     while (start64 - off_first > 
> (apr_uint64_t)copy->length) {
> >                         apr_bucket *tmp;
> > -                        int i = 0;
> > +                        /* don't allow inf. spin */
> >                         if (i++ >= 99999)
> >                             return APR_EINVAL;
> >
> 
> IMNSHO such changes need to be voted upon before commiting to 
> branches/2.2.x. When can this case happen? And why do it for 
> the start 
> bucket but not for the end bucket?

Agreed. Please let us bring this in shape in trunk and backport a voted solution later on
to 2.2.x.

Regards

Rüdiger

> 

Mime
View raw message