Thank you Christopher. Is it fine for you if I send a 9th patch which fixes the 3rd one ? ( ...so patches still be applied in sequence from 1 to 9, patch 3 included )
Regards -Max On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 9:49 AM Christopher Faulet <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 14/05/2019 à 11:56, Massimiliano Bellomi a écrit : > > Hi All. > > > > Here attached you may find a set of patches related to WURFL module. > > > > Patches from 0001 to 0004 should implements Christopher's last > > suggestions/issues. > > > > * segfault when I try to retrieve an unknown data (I mean not listed > > in wurfl-information-list). > > * the channel validity must be checked calling the macro > > CHECK_HTTP_MESSAGE_FIRST(). > > * the function ha_wurfl_retrieve_header() is not HTX aware > > * It could be cool to call ha_wurfl_retrieve_header() from the dummy > > library, in wurfl_lookup(). > > > > Patches from 0005 to 0008 corrects some small issues found during this > > activity. > > > > Thank you in advance for your feedback. ( ...and thank you Willy for > > your clarifications on send_log() ) > > > > Hi, > > There is a problem with the third patch ("MINOR WURFL makes > ha_wurfl_retrieve_header() HTX aware"). It is probably my fault because > my previous feedback was not so explicit. ha_wurfl_retrieve_header() > must be HTX aware. But the samples too, ha_wurfl_get_all() and > ha_wurfl_get(). > > In HTTP sample fetches, we should switch on the proxy option > PR_O2_USE_HTX to call the right prefetch function. This way: > > if (smp->px->options2 & PR_O2_USE_HTX) { > /* HTX version */ > struct htx *htx = smp_prefetch_htx(smp, chn, 1); > > if (!htx) > return 0; > ... > } > else { > /* LEGACY version */ > CHECK_HTTP_MESSAGE_FIRST(chn); > > .... > } > > For other patches, it seems to be good. > > -- > Christopher Faulet > -- Massimiliano Bellomi Senior Software Engineer Scientiamobile Italy - [email protected] +39 338 6990288 Milano Office : +39 02 620227260 skype: massimiliano.bellomi
