Hi!
On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 08:07:23PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Although I agree, with your patch in spirit, if apr_thread_join is never
> called, your patch -can- leak handles like a sieve :(
>
> Did we ever define that apr_thread_create() must be partnered with
> an apr_thread_join?
Yes.
>From pthread_join manual page on Linux:
When a joinable thread terminates, its memory resources (thread
descriptor and stack) are not deallocated until another thread performs
pthread_join on it. Therefore, pthread_join must be called once for
each joinable thread created to avoid memory leaks.
In other words you MUST call apr_thread_join when underlying implementation
is pthreads.
> If not, it seems we need a clever way to mark
> the apr_thread_t HANDLE member as destroyed, and allow the
> apr_thread_join to simply return immediately.
This would be an overkill.
Please look here as well:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28460
> Bill
>
> At 04:52 PM 7/31/2004, Max Khon wrote:
> >Hi!
> >
> >apr_thread_join for win32 is implemented incorrectly:
> >thread handle is destroyed too early (in apr_thread_exit).
> >If apr_thread_exit() is called before apr_thread_join() and
> >new object is created (thread handle is reused) before
> >calling apr_thread_join(), apr_thread_join() will possibly wait
> >on invalid handle.
> >
> >Patch is attached.
