On 06/01/2007 09:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Author: jim > Date: Fri Jun 1 12:28:31 2007 > New Revision: 543583 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=543583 > Log: > Create work-in-progress branch >
> > Modified: > httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/experimental/event/event.c > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/experimental/event/event.c?view=diff&rev=543583&r1=543523&r2=543583 > ============================================================================== > --- > httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/experimental/event/event.c > (original) > +++ > httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/experimental/event/event.c > Fri Jun 1 12:28:31 2007 > @@ -1643,6 +1643,7 @@ > /* else */ > ap_scoreboard_image->parent[slot].quiescing = 0; > ap_scoreboard_image->parent[slot].pid = pid; > + ap_set_pid_table(pid); > return 0; > } > > @@ -2062,10 +2063,13 @@ > active_children = 0; > for (index = 0; index < ap_daemons_limit; ++index) { > if (MPM_CHILD_PID(index) != 0) { > - if (kill(MPM_CHILD_PID(index), 0) == 0) { > + if (ap_in_pid_table(MPM_CHILD_PID(index))) { > + if (kill(MPM_CHILD_PID(index), 0) == 0) { > active_children = 1; > + ap_unset_pid_table(MPM_CHILD_PID(index)); Isn't this wrong? We do not kill the child here. We only know that we could (because we used 0 as signal). > /* Having just one child is enough to stay > around */ > break; > + } Maybe we should do an unset here because kill( ,0) failed? > } > } > } > Regards Rüdiger
