You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> on 2001/12/29 02:22:47 UTC
APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
There were some changes made recently to accomodate the ackwardness of
the non-portable functions on platforms that have no use for them,
specifically for use in the worker MPM. If APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP is
not defined, we no longer use the apr_proc_mutex_create_np() routine.
This seems reasonable, except that since we don't define this symbol
anywhere, we've effectively broken the AcceptMutex directive for
the worker MPM.
I started to implement a hack on Unix (where this function is defined
and usable), but after discovering this to be more work than it's worth,
I decided to come back to the list so that we can sort this whole thing
out once and for all:
What do we do about these _np functions? I've grown quite accustomed to
being able to switch over to AcceptMutex pthread whenever I want, but
this whole concept goes against the grain in APR. I could go either way
(for keeping or removing), but aparently others cannot. Duke it out or
whatever, but let's get this solved.
-aaron
For now, here's a lame hack for apache to get the AcceptMutex working again
on the worker MPM under Unix:
Index: os/unix/os.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/os/unix/os.h,v
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u -r1.17 os.h
--- os/unix/os.h 23 Aug 2001 19:08:20 -0000 1.17
+++ os/unix/os.h 29 Dec 2001 01:15:30 -0000
@@ -66,4 +66,6 @@
#define PLATFORM "Unix"
#endif
+#define APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP 1
+
#endif /* !APACHE_OS_H */
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> writes:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 04:48:12PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > > > I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> > > > you to specify the implementation is always available and
> > > > APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
> > > >
> > > > One way to do that:
> > > >
> > > > . get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
> > > >
> > > > . add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> > > > apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> > > > most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
> >
> > This patch would seem to implement this:
>
> ++1 (in concept, untested).
>
> Let's get this committed, work out the kinks and go with it.
will-do, probably in next half-hour
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> writes:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 04:48:12PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > > > I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> > > > you to specify the implementation is always available and
> > > > APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
> > > >
> > > > One way to do that:
> > > >
> > > > . get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
> > > >
> > > > . add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> > > > apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> > > > most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
> >
> > This patch would seem to implement this:
>
> ++1 (in concept, untested).
>
> Let's get this committed, work out the kinks and go with it.
will-do, probably in next half-hour
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 04:48:12PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > > I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> > > you to specify the implementation is always available and
> > > APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
> > >
> > > One way to do that:
> > >
> > > . get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
> > >
> > > . add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> > > apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> > > most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
>
> This patch would seem to implement this:
++1 (in concept, untested).
Let's get this committed, work out the kinks and go with it.
-aaron
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 04:48:12PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > > I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> > > you to specify the implementation is always available and
> > > APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
> > >
> > > One way to do that:
> > >
> > > . get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
> > >
> > > . add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> > > apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> > > most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
>
> This patch would seem to implement this:
++1 (in concept, untested).
Let's get this committed, work out the kinks and go with it.
-aaron
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net> writes:
> At the moment, I'm more concerned with the fact that without any
> patches APR_HAS_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE isn't getting enabled on my Linux
> box if don't specify --disable-threads (or at least that is what it
> seems like).
scratch that... stupidity on my part
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net> writes:
> This patch would seem to implement this:
There is also some cleanup needed in apr/configure.in to remove
lockcreatenp logic (for setting a symbol in apr.h).
At the moment, I'm more concerned with the fact that without any
patches APR_HAS_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE isn't getting enabled on my Linux
box if don't specify --disable-threads (or at least that is what it
seems like).
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com> writes:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 09:49:23AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> > you to specify the implementation is always available and
> > APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
> >
> > One way to do that:
> >
> > . get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
> >
> > . add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> > apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> > most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
>
> I was about to say the same thing (even had a message written last
> night to that effect). So, +1. -- justin
This patch would seem to implement this:
Index: include/mpm_common.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/include/mpm_common.h,v
retrieving revision 1.30
diff -u -r1.30 mpm_common.h
--- include/mpm_common.h 17 Nov 2001 14:02:25 -0000 1.30
+++ include/mpm_common.h 29 Dec 2001 21:46:46 -0000
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@
* The system mutex implementation to use for the accept mutex.
*/
#ifdef AP_MPM_WANT_SET_ACCEPT_LOCK_MECH
-extern apr_lockmech_e_np ap_accept_lock_mech;
+extern apr_lockmech_e ap_accept_lock_mech;
const char *ap_mpm_set_accept_lock_mech(cmd_parms *cmd, void *dummy,
const char *arg);
#endif
Index: modules/aaa/mod_auth_digest.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/modules/aaa/mod_auth_digest.c,v
retrieving revision 1.55
diff -u -r1.55 mod_auth_digest.c
--- modules/aaa/mod_auth_digest.c 29 Dec 2001 03:34:33 -0000 1.55
+++ modules/aaa/mod_auth_digest.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:49 -0000
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@
tmpnam(client_lock_name);
sts = apr_lock_create(&client_lock, APR_READWRITE, APR_LOCKALL,
- client_lock_name, ctx);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, client_lock_name, ctx);
if (sts != APR_SUCCESS) {
log_error_and_cleanup("failed to create lock", sts, s);
return;
@@ -382,7 +382,7 @@
tmpnam(opaque_lock_name);
sts = apr_lock_create(&opaque_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL,
- opaque_lock_name, ctx);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, opaque_lock_name, ctx);
if (sts != APR_SUCCESS) {
log_error_and_cleanup("failed to create lock", sts, s);
return;
Index: modules/mappers/mod_rewrite.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/modules/mappers/mod_rewrite.c,v
retrieving revision 1.90
diff -u -r1.90 mod_rewrite.c
--- modules/mappers/mod_rewrite.c 23 Nov 2001 16:35:22 -0000 1.90
+++ modules/mappers/mod_rewrite.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:51 -0000
@@ -941,8 +941,8 @@
proxy_available = (ap_find_linked_module("mod_proxy.c") != NULL);
/* create the rewriting lockfiles in the parent */
- if ((rv = apr_lock_create (&rewrite_log_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL,
- NULL, p)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
+ if ((rv = apr_lock_create(&rewrite_log_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, p)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_CRIT, rv, s,
"mod_rewrite: could not create rewrite_log_lock");
return HTTP_INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR;
@@ -3266,7 +3266,8 @@
lockname = ap_server_root_relative(p, lockname);
/* create the lockfile */
- rc = apr_lock_create (&rewrite_mapr_lock_acquire, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL, lockname, p);
+ rc = apr_lock_create(&rewrite_mapr_lock_acquire, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, lockname, p);
if (rc != APR_SUCCESS) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, rc, s,
"mod_rewrite: Parent could not create RewriteLock "
Index: modules/ssl/ssl_engine_mutex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/modules/ssl/ssl_engine_mutex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -r1.6 ssl_engine_mutex.c
--- modules/ssl/ssl_engine_mutex.c 19 Jul 2001 16:08:01 -0000 1.6
+++ modules/ssl/ssl_engine_mutex.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:51 -0000
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
if (mc->nMutexMode == SSL_MUTEXMODE_NONE)
return TRUE;
- if (apr_lock_create(&mc->pMutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL,
+ if (apr_lock_create(&mc->pMutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT,
mc->szMutexFile, p) != APR_SUCCESS)
return FALSE;
return TRUE;
Index: server/mpm_common.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm_common.c,v
retrieving revision 1.76
diff -u -r1.76 mpm_common.c
--- server/mpm_common.c 18 Dec 2001 13:48:52 -0000 1.76
+++ server/mpm_common.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:52 -0000
@@ -603,7 +603,7 @@
#endif
#ifdef AP_MPM_WANT_SET_ACCEPT_LOCK_MECH
-apr_lockmech_e_np ap_accept_lock_mech = APR_LOCK_DEFAULT;
+apr_lockmech_e ap_accept_lock_mech = APR_LOCK_DEFAULT;
AP_DECLARE(const char *) ap_mpm_set_accept_lock_mech(cmd_parms *cmd,
void *dummy,
const char *arg)
Index: server/mpm/beos/beos.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/beos/beos.c,v
retrieving revision 1.74
diff -u -r1.74 beos.c
--- server/mpm/beos/beos.c 18 Dec 2001 13:48:53 -0000 1.74
+++ server/mpm/beos/beos.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:53 -0000
@@ -813,7 +813,7 @@
* in select at a time
*/
if ((rv = apr_lock_create(&accept_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS,
- NULL, pconf)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pconf)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
/* tsch tsch, can't have more than one thread in the accept loop
at a time so we need to fall on our sword... */
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_EMERG, rv, s,
@@ -825,7 +825,7 @@
* locks the worker_thread_count so we have ana ccurate count...
*/
if ((rv = apr_lock_create(&worker_thread_count_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS,
- NULL, pconf)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pconf)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_EMERG, rv, s,
"Couldn't create worker thread count lock");
return 1;
Index: server/mpm/perchild/perchild.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/perchild/perchild.c,v
retrieving revision 1.96
diff -u -r1.96 perchild.c
--- server/mpm/perchild/perchild.c 23 Dec 2001 14:22:36 -0000 1.96
+++ server/mpm/perchild/perchild.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:54 -0000
@@ -1012,15 +1012,15 @@
}
apr_pool_create(&thread_pool_parent, pchild);
apr_lock_create(&thread_pool_parent_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- NULL, pchild);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pchild);
apr_lock_create(&idle_thread_count_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- NULL, pchild);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pchild);
apr_lock_create(&worker_thread_count_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- NULL, pchild);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pchild);
apr_lock_create(&pipe_of_death_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- NULL, pchild);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pchild);
apr_lock_create(&thread_accept_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- NULL, pchild);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pchild);
apr_threadattr_create(&worker_thread_attr, pchild);
apr_threadattr_detach_set(worker_thread_attr, 1);
@@ -1295,9 +1295,9 @@
ap_lock_fname = apr_psprintf(_pconf, "%s.%u",
ap_server_root_relative(_pconf, ap_lock_fname),
my_pid);
- rv = SAFE_ACCEPT(apr_lock_create_np(&process_accept_mutex, APR_MUTEX,
- APR_CROSS_PROCESS, ap_accept_lock_mech,
- ap_lock_fname, _pconf));
+ rv = SAFE_ACCEPT(apr_lock_create(&process_accept_mutex, APR_MUTEX,
+ APR_CROSS_PROCESS, ap_accept_lock_mech,
+ ap_lock_fname, _pconf));
if (rv != APR_SUCCESS) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_EMERG, rv, s,
"Couldn't create cross-process lock");
Index: server/mpm/prefork/prefork.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/prefork/prefork.c,v
retrieving revision 1.226
diff -u -r1.226 prefork.c
--- server/mpm/prefork/prefork.c 19 Dec 2001 14:49:22 -0000 1.226
+++ server/mpm/prefork/prefork.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:55 -0000
@@ -265,8 +265,8 @@
apr_status_t rv;
expand_lock_fname(p);
- rv = apr_lock_create_np(&accept_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS,
- ap_accept_lock_mech, ap_lock_fname, p);
+ rv = apr_lock_create(&accept_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS,
+ ap_accept_lock_mech, ap_lock_fname, p);
if (rv) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_EMERG, rv, NULL, "couldn't create accept mutex");
exit(APEXIT_INIT);
Index: server/mpm/spmt_os2/spmt_os2.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/spmt_os2/spmt_os2.c,v
retrieving revision 1.112
diff -u -r1.112 spmt_os2.c
--- server/mpm/spmt_os2/spmt_os2.c 18 Dec 2001 13:48:53 -0000 1.112
+++ server/mpm/spmt_os2/spmt_os2.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:56 -0000
@@ -187,7 +187,8 @@
*/
static void accept_mutex_init(apr_pool_t *p)
{
- apr_status_t rc = apr_lock_create(&accept_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS, NULL, p);
+ apr_status_t rc = apr_lock_create(&accept_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, p);
if (rc != APR_SUCCESS) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_EMERG, rc, ap_server_conf,
Index: server/mpm/winnt/mpm_winnt.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/winnt/mpm_winnt.c,v
retrieving revision 1.202
diff -u -r1.202 mpm_winnt.c
--- server/mpm/winnt/mpm_winnt.c 18 Dec 2001 13:48:53 -0000 1.202
+++ server/mpm/winnt/mpm_winnt.c 29 Dec 2001 21:46:58 -0000
@@ -988,7 +988,7 @@
if (one_process) {
/* Single process mode */
apr_lock_create(&start_mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS,
- signal_name_prefix, pconf);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, signal_name_prefix, pconf);
exit_event = CreateEvent(NULL, TRUE, FALSE, exit_event_name);
}
else {
@@ -1013,7 +1013,8 @@
ap_run_child_init(pchild, ap_server_conf);
allowed_globals.jobsemaphore = CreateSemaphore(NULL, 0, 1000000, NULL);
- apr_lock_create(&allowed_globals.jobmutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS, NULL, pchild);
+ apr_lock_create(&allowed_globals.jobmutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pchild);
/*
* Wait until we have permission to start accepting connections.
@@ -1040,7 +1041,8 @@
NULL,
0,
0); /* CONCURRENT ACTIVE THREADS */
- apr_lock_create(&qlock, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS, NULL, pchild);
+ apr_lock_create(&qlock, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT,
+ NULL, pchild);
}
/*
@@ -1993,8 +1995,9 @@
* Ths start mutex is used during a restart to prevent more than one
* child process from entering the accept loop at once.
*/
- apr_lock_create(&start_mutex,APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS, signal_name_prefix,
- ap_server_conf->process->pool);
+ apr_lock_create(&start_mutex,APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, signal_name_prefix,
+ ap_server_conf->process->pool);
}
}
else /* parent_pid != my_pid */
Index: server/mpm/worker/mpm.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker/mpm.h,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -r1.7 mpm.h
--- server/mpm/worker/mpm.h 25 Dec 2001 02:30:53 -0000 1.7
+++ server/mpm/worker/mpm.h 29 Dec 2001 21:46:58 -0000
@@ -73,9 +73,7 @@
#define AP_MPM_WANT_SET_LOCKFILE
#define AP_MPM_WANT_SET_MAX_REQUESTS
#define AP_MPM_WANT_SET_COREDUMPDIR
-#if APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP
#define AP_MPM_WANT_SET_ACCEPT_LOCK_MECH
-#endif /* APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP */
#define AP_MPM_DISABLE_NAGLE_ACCEPTED_SOCK
#define MPM_SYNC_CHILD_TABLE() (ap_sync_scoreboard_image())
Index: server/mpm/worker/worker.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker/worker.c,v
retrieving revision 1.57
diff -u -r1.57 worker.c
--- server/mpm/worker/worker.c 29 Dec 2001 17:36:17 -0000 1.57
+++ server/mpm/worker/worker.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:00 -0000
@@ -1399,20 +1399,14 @@
ap_server_root_relative(_pconf, ap_lock_fname),
ap_my_pid);
-#if APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP
- rv = apr_proc_mutex_create_np(&accept_mutex, ap_lock_fname,
- ap_accept_lock_mech, _pconf);
-#else
- rv = apr_proc_mutex_create(&accept_mutex, ap_lock_fname, _pconf);
-#endif /* APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP */
-
+ rv = apr_proc_mutex_create(&accept_mutex, ap_lock_fname,
+ ap_accept_lock_mech, _pconf);
if (rv != APR_SUCCESS) {
ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_EMERG, rv, s,
"Couldn't create accept lock");
return 1;
}
-#if APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP
#if APR_USE_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE
if (ap_accept_lock_mech == APR_LOCK_DEFAULT ||
ap_accept_lock_mech == APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM) {
@@ -1426,7 +1420,6 @@
return 1;
}
}
-#endif /* APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP */
if (!is_graceful) {
ap_run_pre_mpm(pconf, SB_SHARED);
Index: srclib/apr/file_io/os2/open.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/file_io/os2/open.c,v
retrieving revision 1.45
diff -u -r1.45 open.c
--- srclib/apr/file_io/os2/open.c 10 Aug 2001 21:04:47 -0000 1.45
+++ srclib/apr/file_io/os2/open.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:00 -0000
@@ -99,7 +99,8 @@
if (dafile->buffered) {
dafile->buffer = apr_palloc(cntxt, APR_FILE_BUFSIZE);
- rv = apr_lock_create(&dafile->mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS, NULL, cntxt);
+ rv = apr_lock_create(&dafile->mutex, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, cntxt);
if (rv)
return rv;
Index: srclib/apr/include/apr_lock.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/include/apr_lock.h,v
retrieving revision 1.30
diff -u -r1.30 apr_lock.h
--- srclib/apr/include/apr_lock.h 17 Aug 2001 03:54:04 -0000 1.30
+++ srclib/apr/include/apr_lock.h 29 Dec 2001 21:47:00 -0000
@@ -80,6 +80,9 @@
typedef enum {APR_READER, APR_WRITER} apr_readerwriter_e;
+typedef enum {APR_LOCK_FCNTL, APR_LOCK_FLOCK, APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM, APR_LOCK_PROC_PTHREAD,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT} apr_lockmech_e;
+
typedef struct apr_lock_t apr_lock_t;
/* Function definitions */
@@ -99,16 +102,27 @@
* APR_LOCKALL lock processes and threads from the
* protected area.
* </PRE>
+ * @param mech The mechanism to use for the interprocess lock, if any; one of
+ * <PRE>
+ * APR_LOCK_FCNTL
+ * APR_LOCK_FLOCK
+ * APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM
+ * APR_LOCK_PROC_PTHREAD
+ * APR_LOCK_DEFAULT pick the default mechanism for the platform
+ * </PRE>
* @param fname A file name to use if the lock mechanism requires one. This
* argument should always be provided. The lock code itself will
* determine if it should be used.
* @param pool The pool to operate on.
* @warning APR_CROSS_PROCESS may lock both processes and threads, but it is
* only guaranteed to lock processes.
+ * @warning Check APR_HAS_foo_SERIALIZE defines to see if the platform supports
+ * APR_LOCK_foo. Only APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is portable.
*/
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create(apr_lock_t **lock,
apr_locktype_e type,
apr_lockscope_e scope,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
const char *fname,
apr_pool_t *pool);
@@ -184,52 +198,6 @@
const char *key,
apr_status_t (*cleanup)(void *));
-#if APR_HAS_LOCK_CREATE_NP
-
-typedef enum {APR_LOCK_FCNTL, APR_LOCK_FLOCK, APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM, APR_LOCK_PROC_PTHREAD,
- APR_LOCK_DEFAULT} apr_lockmech_e_np;
-
-/**
- * non-portable interface to apr_lock_create()
- *
- * Create a new instance of a lock structure. This is like apr_lock_create()
- * but has some non-portable parameters. This should be used sparingly.
- *
- * @param lock The newly created lock structure.
- * @param type The type of lock to create, one of:
- * <PRE>
- * APR_MUTEX
- * APR_READWRITE
- * </PRE>
- * @param scope The scope of the lock to create, one of:
- * <PRE>
- * APR_CROSS_PROCESS lock processes from the protected area.
- * APR_INTRAPROCESS lock threads from the protected area.
- * APR_LOCKALL lock processes and threads from the
- * protected area.
- * </PRE>
- * @param mech The mechanism to use for the interprocess lock, if any; one of
- * <PRE>
- * APR_LOCK_FCNTL
- * APR_LOCK_FLOCK
- * APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM
- * APR_LOCK_PROC_PTHREAD
- * APR_LOCK_DEFAULT pick the default mechanism for the platform
- * </PRE>
- * @param fname A file name to use if the lock mechanism requires one. This
- * argument should always be provided. The lock code itself will
- * determine if it should be used.
- * @param pool The pool to operate on.
- * @warning APR_CROSS_PROCESS may lock both processes and threads, but it is
- * only guaranteed to lock processes.
- */
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create_np(apr_lock_t **lock,
- apr_locktype_e type,
- apr_lockscope_e scope,
- apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- const char *fname,
- apr_pool_t *pool);
-#endif /* APR_HAS_LOCK_CREATE_NP */
/** @} */
#ifdef __cplusplus
}
Index: srclib/apr/include/apr_proc_mutex.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/include/apr_proc_mutex.h,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.3 apr_proc_mutex.h
--- srclib/apr/include/apr_proc_mutex.h 29 Sep 2001 05:03:37 -0000 1.3
+++ srclib/apr/include/apr_proc_mutex.h 29 Dec 2001 21:47:00 -0000
@@ -86,21 +86,6 @@
* @param fname A file name to use if the lock mechanism requires one. This
* argument should always be provided. The lock code itself will
* determine if it should be used.
- * @param pool the pool from which to allocate the mutex.
- */
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
- const char *fname,
- apr_pool_t *pool);
-
-/**
- * non-portable interface to apr_proc_mutex_create()
- *
- * Create and initialize a mutex that can be used to synchronize processes.
- * @param mutex the memory address where the newly created mutex will be
- * stored.
- * @param fname A file name to use if the lock mechanism requires one. This
- * argument should always be provided. The lock code itself will
- * determine if it should be used.
* @param mech The mechanism to use for the interprocess lock, if any; one of
* <PRE>
* APR_LOCK_FCNTL
@@ -111,12 +96,10 @@
* </PRE>
* @param pool the pool from which to allocate the mutex.
*/
-#if APR_HAS_LOCK_CREATE_NP
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create_np(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
- const char *fname,
- apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- apr_pool_t *pool);
-#endif
+APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
+ const char *fname,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
+ apr_pool_t *pool);
/**
* Re-open a mutex in a child process.
Index: srclib/apr/locks/beos/locks.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/beos/locks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.34
diff -u -r1.34 locks.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/beos/locks.c 10 Aug 2001 21:04:47 -0000 1.34
+++ srclib/apr/locks/beos/locks.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:01 -0000
@@ -274,12 +274,16 @@
}
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create(apr_lock_t **lock, apr_locktype_e type,
- apr_lockscope_e scope, const char *fname,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
+ apr_lockscope_e scope, apr_lockmech_e mech,
+ const char *fname, apr_pool_t *pool)
{
apr_lock_t *new;
apr_status_t stat = APR_SUCCESS;
-
+
+ if (mech != APR_LOCK_DEFAULT) {
+ return APR_ENOTIMPL;
+ }
+
new = (apr_lock_t *)apr_pcalloc(pool, sizeof(apr_lock_t));
if (new == NULL){
return APR_ENOMEM;
Index: srclib/apr/locks/beos/proc_mutex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/beos/proc_mutex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -r1.5 proc_mutex.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/beos/proc_mutex.c 23 Dec 2001 13:06:40 -0000 1.5
+++ srclib/apr/locks/beos/proc_mutex.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:01 -0000
@@ -79,11 +79,16 @@
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
apr_pool_t *pool)
{
apr_proc_mutex_t *new;
apr_status_t stat = APR_SUCCESS;
+ if (mech != APR_LOCK_DEFAULT) {
+ return APR_ENOTIMPL;
+ }
+
new = (apr_proc_mutex_t *)apr_pcalloc(pool, sizeof(apr_proc_mutex_t));
if (new == NULL){
return APR_ENOMEM;
@@ -103,16 +108,6 @@
(*mutex) = new;
return APR_SUCCESS;
}
-
-#if APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create_np(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
- const char *fname,
- apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
-{
- return APR_ENOTIMPL;
-}
-#endif
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_child_init(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
Index: srclib/apr/locks/netware/locks.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/netware/locks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 locks.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/netware/locks.c 6 Aug 2001 15:50:49 -0000 1.1
+++ srclib/apr/locks/netware/locks.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:01 -0000
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@
}
apr_status_t apr_lock_create(apr_lock_t **lock, apr_locktype_e type, apr_lockscope_e scope,
- const char *fname, apr_pool_t *pool)
+ apr_lockmech_e mech, const char *fname, apr_pool_t *pool)
{
apr_lock_t *newlock = NULL;
@@ -94,6 +94,10 @@
NXLockInfo_t *info; //for libc NKS NXRwLockAlloc
apr_status_t status;
long flags = 0;
+
+ if (mech != APR_LOCK_DEFAULT) {
+ return APR_ENOTIMPL;
+ }
newlock = (apr_lock_t *)apr_palloc(pool, sizeof(apr_lock_t));
Index: srclib/apr/locks/netware/proc_mutex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/netware/proc_mutex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.3 proc_mutex.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/netware/proc_mutex.c 19 Oct 2001 23:25:28 -0000 1.3
+++ srclib/apr/locks/netware/proc_mutex.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:01 -0000
@@ -61,18 +61,11 @@
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
apr_pool_t *pool)
{
return APR_ENOTIMPL;
}
-
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create_np(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
- const char *fname,
- apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
-{
- return APR_ENOTIMPL;
-}
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_child_init(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
Index: srclib/apr/locks/os2/locks.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/os2/locks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.35
diff -u -r1.35 locks.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/os2/locks.c 10 Aug 2001 21:04:47 -0000 1.35
+++ srclib/apr/locks/os2/locks.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:01 -0000
@@ -72,8 +72,8 @@
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create(apr_lock_t **lock, apr_locktype_e type,
- apr_lockscope_e scope, const char *fname,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
+ apr_lockscope_e scope, apr_lockmech_e mech,
+ const char *fname, apr_pool_t *pool)
{
apr_lock_t *new;
ULONG rc;
@@ -83,6 +83,10 @@
/* FIXME: Remove when read write locks implemented. */
if (type == APR_READWRITE)
return APR_ENOTIMPL;
+
+ if (mech != APR_LOCK_DEFAULT) {
+ return APR_ENOTIMPL;
+ }
new = (apr_lock_t *)apr_palloc(pool, sizeof(apr_lock_t));
Index: srclib/apr/locks/os2/proc_mutex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/os2/proc_mutex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -r1.5 proc_mutex.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/os2/proc_mutex.c 29 Dec 2001 10:03:39 -0000 1.5
+++ srclib/apr/locks/os2/proc_mutex.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:01 -0000
@@ -62,20 +62,11 @@
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
apr_pool_t *pool)
{
return APR_ENOTIMPL;
}
-
-#if APR_HAS_LOCK_CREATE_NP
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create_np(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
- const char *fname,
- apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
-{
- return APR_ENOTIMPL;
-}
-#endif
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_child_init(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
Index: srclib/apr/locks/unix/locks.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/unix/locks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.63
diff -u -r1.63 locks.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/unix/locks.c 24 Sep 2001 05:41:57 -0000 1.63
+++ srclib/apr/locks/unix/locks.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:02 -0000
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@
lockall_child_init
};
-static apr_status_t choose_method(apr_lock_t *new, apr_lockmech_e_np mech)
+static apr_status_t choose_method(apr_lock_t *new, apr_lockmech_e mech)
{
switch (mech) {
case APR_LOCK_FCNTL:
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@
return APR_SUCCESS;
}
-static apr_status_t create_lock(apr_lock_t *new, apr_lockmech_e_np mech, const char *fname)
+static apr_status_t create_lock(apr_lock_t *new, apr_lockmech_e mech, const char *fname)
{
apr_status_t stat;
@@ -230,9 +230,9 @@
return APR_SUCCESS;
}
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create_np(apr_lock_t **lock, apr_locktype_e type,
- apr_lockscope_e scope, apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- const char *fname, apr_pool_t *pool)
+APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create(apr_lock_t **lock, apr_locktype_e type,
+ apr_lockscope_e scope, apr_lockmech_e mech,
+ const char *fname, apr_pool_t *pool)
{
apr_lock_t *new;
apr_status_t stat;
@@ -251,13 +251,6 @@
*lock = new;
return APR_SUCCESS;
-}
-
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create(apr_lock_t **lock, apr_locktype_e type,
- apr_lockscope_e scope, const char *fname,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
-{
- return apr_lock_create_np(lock, type, scope, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, fname, pool);
}
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_acquire(apr_lock_t *lock)
Index: srclib/apr/locks/unix/proc_mutex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/unix/proc_mutex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -u -r1.8 proc_mutex.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/unix/proc_mutex.c 25 Oct 2001 14:52:43 -0000 1.8
+++ srclib/apr/locks/unix/proc_mutex.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:02 -0000
@@ -624,15 +624,7 @@
#endif
}
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-static apr_status_t proc_mutex_choose_method(apr_proc_mutex_t *new_mutex, apr_lockmech_e_np mech)
+static apr_status_t proc_mutex_choose_method(apr_proc_mutex_t *new_mutex, apr_lockmech_e mech)
{
switch (mech) {
case APR_LOCK_FCNTL:
@@ -682,7 +674,7 @@
return APR_SUCCESS;
}
-static apr_status_t proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t *new_mutex, apr_lockmech_e_np mech, const char *fname)
+static apr_status_t proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t *new_mutex, apr_lockmech_e mech, const char *fname)
{
apr_status_t rv;
@@ -703,15 +695,8 @@
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
apr_pool_t *pool)
-{
- return apr_proc_mutex_create_np(mutex, fname, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, pool);
-}
-
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create_np(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
- const char *fname,
- apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
{
apr_proc_mutex_t *new_mutex;
apr_status_t rv;
Index: srclib/apr/locks/win32/locks.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/win32/locks.c,v
retrieving revision 1.47
diff -u -r1.47 locks.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/win32/locks.c 27 Nov 2001 05:22:34 -0000 1.47
+++ srclib/apr/locks/win32/locks.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:02 -0000
@@ -85,6 +85,7 @@
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_lock_create(apr_lock_t **lock,
apr_locktype_e type,
apr_lockscope_e scope,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
const char *fname,
apr_pool_t *pool)
{
@@ -94,6 +95,10 @@
/* FIXME: Remove when read write locks implemented. */
if (type == APR_READWRITE)
return APR_ENOTIMPL;
+
+ if (mech != APR_LOCK_DEFAULT) {
+ return APR_ENOTIMPL;
+ }
newlock = (apr_lock_t *)apr_palloc(pool, sizeof(apr_lock_t));
Index: srclib/apr/locks/win32/proc_mutex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/locks/win32/proc_mutex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.3 proc_mutex.c
--- srclib/apr/locks/win32/proc_mutex.c 19 Oct 2001 23:25:28 -0000 1.3
+++ srclib/apr/locks/win32/proc_mutex.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:02 -0000
@@ -61,15 +61,8 @@
APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
const char *fname,
+ apr_lockmech_e mech,
apr_pool_t *pool)
-{
- return APR_ENOTIMPL;
-}
-
-APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_proc_mutex_create_np(apr_proc_mutex_t **mutex,
- const char *fname,
- apr_lockmech_e_np mech,
- apr_pool_t *pool)
{
return APR_ENOTIMPL;
}
Index: srclib/apr/shmem/unix/shmem.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/shmem/unix/shmem.c,v
retrieving revision 1.33
diff -u -r1.33 shmem.c
--- srclib/apr/shmem/unix/shmem.c 30 Aug 2001 17:11:04 -0000 1.33
+++ srclib/apr/shmem/unix/shmem.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:03 -0000
@@ -209,7 +209,8 @@
new_m->curmem = mem;
new_m->length = reqsize;
- apr_lock_create(&new_m->lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS, NULL, pool);
+ apr_lock_create(&new_m->lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_CROSS_PROCESS,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, NULL, pool);
if (!new_m->lock)
return APR_EGENERAL;
Index: srclib/apr/test/testlock.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/test/testlock.c,v
retrieving revision 1.15
diff -u -r1.15 testlock.c
--- srclib/apr/test/testlock.c 2 Dec 2001 14:02:16 -0000 1.15
+++ srclib/apr/test/testlock.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:03 -0000
@@ -267,7 +267,7 @@
printf("RW Lock Tests\n");
printf("%-60s", " Initializing the RW lock");
s1 = apr_lock_create(&thread_rw_lock, APR_READWRITE, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- "lock.file", pool);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, "lock.file", pool);
if (s1 != APR_SUCCESS) {
printf("Failed!\n");
return s1;
@@ -315,7 +315,7 @@
printf("Exclusive lock test\n");
printf("%-60s", " Initializing the lock");
s1 = apr_lock_create(&thread_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- "lock.file", pool);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, "lock.file", pool);
if (s1 != APR_SUCCESS) {
printf("Failed!\n");
@@ -363,8 +363,8 @@
printf("Testing multiple locking\n");
printf("%-60s"," Creating the lock we'll use");
- if ((rv = apr_lock_create(&multi, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL, lockfile,
- pool)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
+ if ((rv = apr_lock_create(&multi, APR_MUTEX, APR_LOCKALL, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT,
+ lockfile, pool)) != APR_SUCCESS) {
printf("Failed!\n");
return rv;
}
Index: srclib/apr/test/testlockperf.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/test/testlockperf.c,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -r1.5 testlockperf.c
--- srclib/apr/test/testlockperf.c 17 Oct 2001 00:33:00 -0000 1.5
+++ srclib/apr/test/testlockperf.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:04 -0000
@@ -154,8 +154,8 @@
printf("apr_lock(INTRAPROCESS, MUTEX) Lock Tests\n");
printf("%-60s", " Initializing the apr_lock_t");
- s1 = apr_lock_create(&inter_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- "lock.file", pool);
+ s1 = apr_lock_create(&inter_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, "lock.file", pool);
if (s1 != APR_SUCCESS) {
printf("Failed!\n");
return s1;
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@
printf("apr_lock(INTRAPROCESS, READWRITE) Lock Tests\n");
printf("%-60s", " Initializing the apr_lock_t");
s1 = apr_lock_create(&inter_rwlock, APR_READWRITE, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
- "lock.file", pool);
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, "lock.file", pool);
if (s1 != APR_SUCCESS) {
printf("Failed!\n");
return s1;
Index: srclib/apr/test/testprocmutex.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/test/testprocmutex.c,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -r1.5 testprocmutex.c
--- srclib/apr/test/testprocmutex.c 23 Oct 2001 17:30:08 -0000 1.5
+++ srclib/apr/test/testprocmutex.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:04 -0000
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@
printf("Exclusive lock test\n");
printf("%-60s", " Initializing the lock");
- s1 = apr_proc_mutex_create(&proc_lock, lockname, pool);
+ s1 = apr_proc_mutex_create(&proc_lock, lockname, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, pool);
if (s1 != APR_SUCCESS) {
printf("Failed!\n");
Index: srclib/apr/test/testthread.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/test/testthread.c,v
retrieving revision 1.26
diff -u -r1.26 testthread.c
--- srclib/apr/test/testthread.c 27 Dec 2001 17:03:00 -0000 1.26
+++ srclib/apr/test/testthread.c 29 Dec 2001 21:47:04 -0000
@@ -129,7 +129,8 @@
apr_thread_once_init(&control, context);
printf("%-60s", "Initializing the lock");
- r1 = apr_lock_create(&thread_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS, "lock.file", context);
+ r1 = apr_lock_create(&thread_lock, APR_MUTEX, APR_INTRAPROCESS,
+ APR_LOCK_DEFAULT, "lock.file", context);
if (r1 != APR_SUCCESS) {
fflush(stdout);
fprintf(stderr, "Failed\nCould not create lock\n");
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com>.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 09:49:23AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> you to specify the implementation is always available and
> APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
>
> One way to do that:
>
> . get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
>
> . add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
I was about to say the same thing (even had a message written last
night to that effect). So, +1. -- justin
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
"Sander Striker" <st...@apache.org> writes:
> What about defining apr_lock_create() as:
>
> #define apr_lock_create(params) \
> apr_lock_create_ex(params, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
>
> And introduce apr_lock_create_ex which has the extra required parameter?
I'd rather it be a function than a macro, but the name certainly works
for me.
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
"Sander Striker" <st...@apache.org> writes:
> What about defining apr_lock_create() as:
>
> #define apr_lock_create(params) \
> apr_lock_create_ex(params, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
>
> And introduce apr_lock_create_ex which has the extra required parameter?
I'd rather it be a function than a macro, but the name certainly works
for me.
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
RE: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
Hi,
> From: trawick@rdu163-40-092.nc.rr.com
> [mailto:trawick@rdu163-40-092.nc.rr.com]On Behalf Of Jeff Trawick
> Sent: 29 December 2001 15:49
> > Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> writes:
>
> > What do we do about these _np functions? I've grown quite accustomed to
> > being able to switch over to AcceptMutex pthread whenever I want
>
> There is no question that you'll continue to be able to do
> "AcceptMutex pthread" :)
>
> , but
> > this whole concept goes against the grain in APR. I could go either way
> > (for keeping or removing), but aparently others cannot. Duke it out or
> > whatever, but let's get this solved.
>
> I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> you to specify the implementation is always available and
> APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
>
> One way to do that:
>
> .. get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
>
> .. add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
What about defining apr_lock_create() as:
#define apr_lock_create(params) \
apr_lock_create_ex(params, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
And introduce apr_lock_create_ex which has the extra required parameter?
> .. expose APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM et al on all platforms
>
> apps that don't want a run-time error can check
> APR_HAS_foo_SERIALIZE to decide whether they should specify
> APR_LOCK_foo
[...]
> Jeff Trawick
Sander
RE: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
Hi,
> From: trawick@rdu163-40-092.nc.rr.com
> [mailto:trawick@rdu163-40-092.nc.rr.com]On Behalf Of Jeff Trawick
> Sent: 29 December 2001 15:49
> > Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> writes:
>
> > What do we do about these _np functions? I've grown quite accustomed to
> > being able to switch over to AcceptMutex pthread whenever I want
>
> There is no question that you'll continue to be able to do
> "AcceptMutex pthread" :)
>
> , but
> > this whole concept goes against the grain in APR. I could go either way
> > (for keeping or removing), but aparently others cannot. Duke it out or
> > whatever, but let's get this solved.
>
> I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
> you to specify the implementation is always available and
> APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
>
> One way to do that:
>
> .. get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
>
> .. add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
> apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
> most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
What about defining apr_lock_create() as:
#define apr_lock_create(params) \
apr_lock_create_ex(params, APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
And introduce apr_lock_create_ex which has the extra required parameter?
> .. expose APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM et al on all platforms
>
> apps that don't want a run-time error can check
> APR_HAS_foo_SERIALIZE to decide whether they should specify
> APR_LOCK_foo
[...]
> Jeff Trawick
Sander
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> writes:
> What do we do about these _np functions? I've grown quite accustomed to
> being able to switch over to AcceptMutex pthread whenever I want
There is no question that you'll continue to be able to do
"AcceptMutex pthread" :)
, but
> this whole concept goes against the grain in APR. I could go either way
> (for keeping or removing), but aparently others cannot. Duke it out or
> whatever, but let's get this solved.
I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
you to specify the implementation is always available and
APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
One way to do that:
. get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
. add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
. expose APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM et al on all platforms
apps that don't want a run-time error can check
APR_HAS_foo_SERIALIZE to decide whether they should specify
APR_LOCK_foo
> For now, here's a lame hack for apache to get the AcceptMutex working again
> on the worker MPM under Unix:
or in apr.h
#if APR_HAS_FCNTL_SERIALIZE (may need to check for something else)
#define APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCK_NP 1
#else
#define APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCK_NP 0
#endif
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCKS_NP not defined where it should be
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org> writes:
> What do we do about these _np functions? I've grown quite accustomed to
> being able to switch over to AcceptMutex pthread whenever I want
There is no question that you'll continue to be able to do
"AcceptMutex pthread" :)
, but
> this whole concept goes against the grain in APR. I could go either way
> (for keeping or removing), but aparently others cannot. Duke it out or
> whatever, but let's get this solved.
I would prefer moving to a situation where the function that allows
you to specify the implementation is always available and
APR_LOCK_DEFAULT is always available.
One way to do that:
. get rid of apr_lock_create_np() and apr_proc_mutex_create_np()
. add new required parameter to apr_lock_create() and
apr_proc_mutex_create() for specifying implementation (expecting
most callers to pass APR_LOCK_DEFAULT)
. expose APR_LOCK_SYSVSEM et al on all platforms
apps that don't want a run-time error can check
APR_HAS_foo_SERIALIZE to decide whether they should specify
APR_LOCK_foo
> For now, here's a lame hack for apache to get the AcceptMutex working again
> on the worker MPM under Unix:
or in apr.h
#if APR_HAS_FCNTL_SERIALIZE (may need to check for something else)
#define APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCK_NP 1
#else
#define APR_HAS_CREATE_LOCK_NP 0
#endif
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...