bryancall commented on PR #13683:
URL: https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/13683#issuecomment-6622815390

   @JosiahWI Thanks for making time for this. To help split it up, here is what 
changed since your review on 15 Sep (at c3b4f4d4):
   
   - **Tests.** Each of your comments has an answer in its thread: 
`pattern_has_jit` now `REQUIRE`s a compiled pattern, the extra sentence is 
gone, the concurrent round is a helper, and the `PCRE2_JIT_TEST_ALLOC` thread 
is still open for you. The 3 KB case needs no gate, because both engines 
redirect it. The concurrent test's deep subjects now need the 1 MiB stack, and 
every round starts at a barrier.
   - **`RegexMatchContext`.** The constructor assigns the JIT stack callback 
directly instead of copying the shared context, so it never creates the 
`thread_local`. Copy assignment frees the old context, and keeps it if the copy 
can't be allocated. The move operations are real now, since the defaulted ones 
freed the context twice. The copy and move paths have tests.
   - **`traffic_layout info`.** Below PCRE2 10.45 it decides `TS_HAS_PCRE2_JIT` 
by JIT compiling a pattern, so a runtime that can't allocate executable memory 
reads false.
   - **regex_remap test.** It moved to Uranium along with master. The checks 
are the same: the 3 KB query expects the 301, and the 64,000 byte query, on a 
JIT build only, expects the 200 and the resource error.
   - **Last two commits.** They only touch comments, to fit the new comment 
rules, plus one test fix: the self move test now sets a match limit, so it 
fails if the self move guard goes away. Before, it passed either way.
   
   If you want three sittings, I'd take test_Regex.cc first, then Regex.cc and 
Regex.h, then info.cc and the Uranium test.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to