On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 11:40:49AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote: > Kelsey Cummings wrote, On 3/07/14 11:21 am: > > This is quick patch to fix this so service_timeout() is guarded with an > > alarm but I don't think it is the only write to a client that needs it. > > For any write to client other than the one that tries to tell the client that > there was a timeout, wouldn't service_timeout() end up being called when the > spamd times out while blocked waiting for that other write to client? What > would be the situation with any other write to client that would need a > similar patch?
Sidney, I only made a brief review of the code path so it is entirely possible that you're correct and this the only write without a timeout. Honestly, we're more concerned about what is causing spamd children to block in the first place but that's proved to be harder to track down. -- Kelsey Cummings - [email protected] sonic.net, inc. System Architect 2260 Apollo Way 707.522.1000 Santa Rosa, CA 95407
