From: "Mladen Turk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 1:52 PM
> I forgot to send a small thing with the patch... > That is the owner flag. With the latest lock patch I've done two things at > once (I know... shoot me :). > The first is the solving locks on WIN2K running terminal services, and the > other is using TRUE for initialowner. The reason for that was that I > couldn't use apr_lock for my win32/shmem proposal, because I have no way to > determine if the mutex was allready created by me or other proccess. The change of initial ownership appeared very problematic, and I'm not about to do so without others' input [we currently do not grab that mutex on creation, and I presume that behavior is consistent with other platforms.] Your patch changed the mutex to owned, yet you didn't unlock it immediately, which I see as a problem. As far as the owner flag, I don't care to have other parts of apr quite so intimately aware of the internals of other parts, it makes the entire codebase more fragile. Bill > Index: locks.h > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apr/include/arch/win32/locks.h,v > retrieving revision 1.12 > diff -u -r1.12 locks.h > --- locks.h 2001/06/06 18:11:34 1.12 > +++ locks.h 2001/10/16 19:36:27 > @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ > HANDLE mutex; > CRITICAL_SECTION section; > char *fname; > + int owner; > }; > > #endif /* LOCKS_H */ > >
