On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 3:24 PM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:18 AM Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:00 PM, <jaillet...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > + *) event: based on the commit log ("use a subpool of pchild since
>> > skiplist
>> > + allocations will happen across threads and are only protected from
>> > + other skiplist operations.", per sf's review comments), it sounds
>> > like this
>> > + should be backported.
>> > + trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1588806
>> > + 2.4.x patch:
>> > http://home.apache.org/~jailletc36/backport_1588806.patch
>> > + +1:
>>
>> Hmm, timer_skiplist seems to be used only when g_timer_skiplist_mtx is
>> locked, am I missing something?
>
> IIUC the risk is colliding with someone else using pchild w/ similar
> locking around just their own use of it.
Oh I see, there shouldn't be much activity on pchild during runtime
but indeed apr_skiplist could race with legal things like
apr_pool_create(..., pchild).
I wonder if apr_skiplist shouldn't handle a subpool by itself though,
by the time this patch is simple enough so I'm +1.
