> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Joe Orton [mailto:[email protected]] > Gesendet: Freitag, 25. September 2015 12:47 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: logio problem with SSL > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 09:50:04AM +0200, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Yann Ylavic <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Eric Covener <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >> two logs (http/https) sorted to top of autoindex here: > > >> http://people.apache.org/~covener/ > > > > > > Looks like mod_ssl should also forward EOR buckets. > > > > > > Does this work: > > > Index: modules/ssl/ssl_engine_io.c > > > =================================================================== > > > --- modules/ssl/ssl_engine_io.c (revision 1705160) > > > +++ modules/ssl/ssl_engine_io.c (working copy) > > > @@ -1707,12 +1707,12 @@ static apr_status_t > ssl_io_filter_output(ap_filter > > > > I committed this one in r1705194, and also the one preventing the > > FLUSH for non-blocking bio_filter_in_read() in r1705236. > > You may not want to apply the latter, for your testing path to be > > consistent with what you had so far... > > The behaviour of that loop is quite bad, it will treat a single brigade > like <EOS EOC> differently to two separate brigades <EOS> <EOC>, > although that should never happen in practice... currently. > > I'm not sure what the "correct" behaviour of connection-level filters > should be with metadata buckets. I could argue they should delete > everything they don't understand. mod_ssl should not care at all about > EOS or EOR. > > But dodging that issue... simplifying the loop like this, does that > still work for the logio issue?
Haven't looked at the logio issue, but this makes sense. +1. The previous different handling of the buckets depending on whether they are split across two brigades or just in one seems wrong. Regards Rüdiger
