httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1778319 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/core/mod_watchdog.c
Date Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:08:37 GMT

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:28 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Joe Orton <jorton@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The only reason why I can see why the orig idea to use s->process->pool
>>>> was to make watchdog run independent of any restarts of httpd
>>>> itself... that is, a truly independent watchdog. But that would
>>>> imply that you can't reconfig watchdog on restarts which
>>>> doesn't seem quite right...
> 
> Some (third party) modules may depend on this, no?
> 
>>> 
>>> Since the callbacks registered with the watchdog come from modules, and
>>> modules have lifetime of pconf, it seems right to me to use pconf.  (I
>>> would guess that without this fix, if at restart you unloaded a module
>>> which had registered a watchdog, it would segfault the server?)
> 
> Modules could "mimic" mod_watchdog behaviour (by using process->pool
> and recover their context at restart)...
> 
> But I don't know any such module, just noting about the behaviour
> change if we use pconf here.
> 

I don't think the intent was such... looking at everything
else, the design of watchdog is consistent with a typical
pconf/clean on restarts and the initial use of s->process->pool
was a bug.

Mime
View raw message