> Am 10.09.2020 um 09:29 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>
>
>
> On 9/9/20 10:21 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Am 08.09.2020 um 21:11 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/8/20 9:22 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Am 08.09.2020 um 08:27 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/21/20 9:20 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/20/20 11:38 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 20.08.2020 um 11:35 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 8/20/20 10:47 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 20.08.2020 um 10:01 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/19/20 12:18 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 19.08.2020 um 12:08 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>
>>>>> Any feedback or comments?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry about the delay, my inbox in unhealthy these days.
>>>
>>> No problem. Even more thanks then for taking time for a review.
>>
>> Thanks for improving this.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Had a quick look. My read: it looks like a good approach. The request
>>>> still needs to be processed in a worker, but that should be very light and
>>>> fast. I was first confused by the "early_http_status" term as there is the
>>>> "103 early hints" intermediate response code stuck in my brain. Maybe we
>>>> should just call it http_status and have a HTTP_NEEDS_FURTHER_PROCESSING
>>>> (0) in our server.
>>>
>>> Updated the PR and renamed early_http_status to http_status.
>>> What do you mean with / what is the purpose of
>>> HTTP_NEEDS_FURTHER_PROCESSING? Should http_status be initialized with this
>>> define
>>> or do you want to replace conditions of the type (http_status) with
>>> (http_status != HTTP_NEEDS_FURTHER_PROCESSING)?
>>> At what place should we define it? In h2.h?
>>
>> Just a thought that 0 could indicate that the http status has not been
>> determined yet (default) or in case of an early error the code to return.
>> Which then prevents further processing. The name for such a value was not
>> entirely serious. We could just check on != 0.
> It is already the case that a value of 0 in http_status indicates that the
> http status has not been determined yet and 0 is
> already the default value via the apr_pcalloc of the structure.
>
> Would you like to see the following?
>
> 1. Make a define like HTTP_NEEDS_FURTHER_PROCESSING (I would propose
> H2_HTTP_STATUS_UNSET, sweet naming discussion :-))
> 2. In addition to the apr_pcalloc which already makes http_status zero set
> http_status explicitly to H2_HTTP_STATUS_UNSET.
> 3. Replace the (http_status) conditions in the ifs with (http_status !=
> H2_HTTP_STATUS_UNSET)
I like that very much. I think it makes good reading.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Rüdiger
