=== ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stipe Tolj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > manglement aside, I'm -1 without an answer to the question on this > > > code which I posted previously... > > > > > > the answer may simply be > > > > > > "with Cygwin, all pthread mutexes are cross-process, so there is no > > > need for such a call" "With Cygwin, no pthread mutexes are cross-process, so the parameter value PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED is invalid". I have implemented a proof-of-concept cross-process mutex, but it's not stable code at this point. > > 2) not all systems which support pthread mutexes have the support to > > make them work cross-process; such systems either neglect to define > > PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED or return an error from > > pthread_mutexattr_setpshared(,PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED) And this applies to us. > > 3) Cygwin always returns an error from > > pthread_mutexattr_setpshared(,PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED) > > > > 4) it is possible for Apache to appear to work correctly without > > proper accept serialization > > > > My conclusion from these facts/assumptions is that with Stipe's change > > he is falling into #4 above. In other words, he isn't getting working > > accept serialization. If that is true, I would prefer that for Cygwin > > we (Stipe) set whatever is required so that we don't try to do accept > > serialization at all, rather than using the pthread mutex support in a > > non-working manner. I'll happily accept contributions to Cygwin to get cross-process mutex's stable, or I can provide some assistance should Stipe wish to implement native win32 mutex's for apache/cygwin (which is an ok if-not-preferred configuration). Rob
