Sorry for taking so long to reply, I got back to work on this code now.

- i'm not sure if I can use a static global variable as a mutex (see
  XXX in the patch)


I don't think there is a problem with that. But couldn't the modperl_global.*
stuff be used for this instead ?


I thought of that.

1) I'm not sure it's a good idea to use a single mutex for several unrelated tasks. That'll slow things down.


As far as I can see, each different modperl_global entrie defined with
the use of MP_GLOBAL_DECL() gets it's own mutex.

that's correct. I've failed to see that behind multiple macros :(

2) I'm not sure how to get hold of that modperl_global variable when we need it.


You don't need it. You can just :
MP_GLOBAL_DECL(anonsub_cnt, int)

And you then get modperl_global_get_anonsub_cnt() for free.

I don't need it for free, since I need to increment and do locking anyway, so I did use the global type, but I've replaced the MP_GLOBAL_DECL with just:


/*** anon handlers code ***/

static modperl_global_t MP_global_anon_cnt;

void modperl_global_anon_cnt_init(apr_pool_t *p)
{
    int *data = (int *)apr_pcalloc(p, sizeof(int));
    *data = 0;
    modperl_global_init(&MP_global_anon_cnt, p, (void *)data, "anon_cnt");
}

int modperl_global_anon_cnt_next(void)
{
    int next;
    /* XXX: inline lock/unlock? */
    modperl_global_lock(&MP_global_anon_cnt);

    next = ++*(int *)(MP_global_anon_cnt.data);

    modperl_global_unlock(&MP_global_anon_cnt);

    return next;
}

since this is all is needed. What do you think about XXX? should I replace those calls with copy-n-pasted locking code? I see they aren't MP_INLINE so I'm not sure whether the compiler will inline those for us.

[...]
as for APR_ANYLOCK, why doug has used the perl locking routines in first place?


Only reason I can see is that if you use Perl's locking routines, when they
are not needed (i.e. no-ithreads), they are #defined as no-ops, while apr_anylock
stuff does have a small overhead even if you pick the apr_anylock_none type (one
pointer dereferencing + integer cmp).

so it's the best to stick with perl locking functions then.

Thanks Philippe!


-- __________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to