"Poul-Henning Kamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Obviously nobody else will ever check the busy flag in that case,
> so the locking isn't necessary.
HSH_Ref() and HSH_Deref() already check that o->objhead != NULL before
trying to lock the mutex, so I applied the same logic to HSH_Unbusy().
Is this a suitable fix?
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Senior Software Developer
Linpro AS - www.linpro.no
Index: bin/varnishd/cache_hash.c
===================================================================
--- bin/varnishd/cache_hash.c (revision 1373)
+++ bin/varnishd/cache_hash.c (working copy)
@@ -185,6 +185,7 @@
void
HSH_Unbusy(struct object *o)
{
+ struct objhead *oh;
struct sess *sp;
CHECK_OBJ_NOTNULL(o, OBJECT_MAGIC);
@@ -192,9 +193,14 @@
assert(o->refcnt > 0);
if (o->cacheable)
EXP_Insert(o);
- LOCK(&o->objhead->mtx);
+ oh = o->objhead;
+ if (oh != NULL) {
+ CHECK_OBJ(oh, OBJHEAD_MAGIC);
+ LOCK(&oh->mtx);
+ }
o->busy = 0;
- UNLOCK(&o->objhead->mtx);
+ if (oh != NULL)
+ UNLOCK(&oh->mtx);
while (1) {
sp = TAILQ_FIRST(&o->waitinglist);
if (sp == NULL)
_______________________________________________
varnish-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
