On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 3:02 PM Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 4/12/24 12:35 PM, yla...@apache.org wrote: > > Author: ylavic > > Date: Fri Apr 12 10:35:10 2024 > > New Revision: 1916925 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1916925&view=rev > > Log: > > mpm_event: Simplify pollset "good methods" vs APR_POLLSET_WAKEABLE. > > > > * server/mpm/event/event.c(setup_threads_runtime): > > Simplify pollset creation code. > > > > All pollset "good methods" implement APR_POLLSET_WAKEABLE and wake-ability > > is quite important for MPM event's correctness anyway so simplify code > > around > > pollset creation so as not to suggest that APR_POLLSET_NODEFAULT if favored > > against APR_POLLSET_WAKEABLE. > > > > While at it account for the wakeup pipe in the pollset_size since not all > > pollset methods seem to do it internally in APR. > > > > > > Modified: > > httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/event/event.c > > > > Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/event/event.c > > URL: > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/event/event.c?rev=1916925&r1=1916924&r2=1916925&view=diff > > ============================================================================== > > --- httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/event/event.c (original) > > +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/event/event.c Fri Apr 12 10:35:10 2024 > > @@ -2630,9 +2630,9 @@ static void setup_threads_runtime(void) > > > > /* Create the main pollset */ > > pollset_flags = APR_POLLSET_THREADSAFE | APR_POLLSET_NOCOPY | > > - APR_POLLSET_NODEFAULT | APR_POLLSET_WAKEABLE; > > + APR_POLLSET_WAKEABLE | APR_POLLSET_NODEFAULT; > > for (i = 0; i < sizeof(good_methods) / sizeof(good_methods[0]); i++) { > > - rv = apr_pollset_create_ex(&event_pollset, pollset_size, pruntime, > > + rv = apr_pollset_create_ex(&event_pollset, pollset_size + 1, > > pruntime, > > You explained this in the commit message above (thanks), but I think it would > be good to add a comment > here in the code why +1 is added to the pollset_size to have the rational at > hand when reading the code.
Good point, done in r1916929 for both event and worker. Regards; Yann.
