[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       apache-httpd-dev
Subject:    Re: proxy segfault in httpd-trunk
From:       Jim Jagielski <jim () jaguNET ! com>
Date:       2013-05-16 12:28:36
Message-ID: C647CCAF-E629-45EB-B933-E97273EB9776 () jaguNET ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


On May 16, 2013, at 4:19 AM, Thomas Eckert <thomas.r.w.eckert@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Just wondering if we also have a problem with the pool
> > as well... if base doesn't have a proxy, we don't have
> > the subpool.
> 
> Looks like it. At least I don't see a reason why Nick's reasoning would apply to \
> the mutex but not to the pool. 
> 

Hold on a tic... the server-conf is created for each server and
it's a *module* level action. It happens whether the top-level
server uses a proxy-or-not. That is, create_server_config
is done on each and every server, regardless of whether
that server *uses* mod_proxy at all. So base->pool and base->mutex
will always line up with a created subpool and mutex since
base is *guaranteed* to exist and base-><field> is guaranteed
to have been created (if done so in create_server_config).

Even with all that, I like Graham's mutex impl better and
with http://svn.apache.org/r1483190 we now ensure child processes
have access to it (which is likely what the orig issue really
was)=


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]