You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> on 2003/09/28 02:15:26 UTC

nested mutexes (was Re: segfault in apr_atomic_cas)

On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 10:22:39PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Others responded, "lets ditch nested locks".  I'm -0.5 on that suggestion.

Are there reasons we should keep it around? I didn't see any comment
from you for or against the proposal, and frankly I didn't get enough
positive or negative feedback to move ahead.

-aaron

RE: nested mutexes (was Re: segfault in apr_atomic_cas)

Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.

> From: Aaron Bannert [mailto:aaron@clove.org]
> Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2003 2:15 AM

> On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 10:22:39PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > Others responded, "lets ditch nested locks".  I'm -0.5 on that suggestion.
> 
> Are there reasons we should keep it around? I didn't see any comment
> from you for or against the proposal, and frankly I didn't get enough
> positive or negative feedback to move ahead.

If you intend to remove it, please ensure there is no fallout in the pools
debug code.  It uses the nested mutexes.


Sander