Hi, I have now created two patches: one for trunk and one for 2.2.x The approach I used is as follows.
TRUNK ===== 1. Set the mpm_state to AP_MPMQ_STOPPING 2.2.x BRANCH ============ 1. Set the mpm_state to AP_MPMQ_STOPPING 2. Return the correct value from ap_graceful_stop_signalled() I considered rewriting http_core.c and http_protocol.c in 2.2.x to use ap_mpm_query(). However third party modules may use ap_graceful_stop_signalled(), so it needed to be fixed anyway, and I didn't want to risk breaking code in http_core and http_protocol that was working well. *All* other mpms support ap_graceful_stop_signalled() in 2.2.x, except Netware. OTHER MPMS ========== I had a quick check through other 2.2.x MPMs and noticed that the Netware MPM appears to have the same issue as prefork. I am not a netware expert, so it might be good to have someone check that out. Please send any feedback. Thanks -Andrew On Wed, 2011-02-02 at 07:43 +0000, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > On 02/02/2011 12:57 AM, Andrew Punch wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have contributed a patch to the long-standing bug 41743. A summary of > > the issue is that if a keep-alive connection is active then the child > > process never exits in certain cases (see bug for full details). > > > > The expected behaviour, the behaviour of worker and the behaviour of 1.3 > > is that a "Connection: close" is issued then the connection is closed. > > > > I have created a patch which simply returns die_now from the function > > ap_graceful_stop_signalled() > > > > Joe Orton commented: > >> The fix for this on the trunk was r645434, which replaced use of > >> ap_graceful_stop_signalled() with ap_mpm_query(). > > > >> This does look insufficient to fix the bug for prefork, since the > > prefork > >> signal handler does not change mpm_state (prefork.c:sig_term). > > > > So my question is which of these alternatives do you prefer: > > 1. Move ahead with my current patch > > 2. I modify prefork.c so the signal handler changes mpm_state > > Without looking into further details I guess we should follow the trunk > fix (r645434) mentioned by Joe in the Bugzilla comment and try to backport it. > Can you please try if this patch > (http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=645434) > fixes your issue as well? > > Regards > > Rüdiger >
