On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 4:55 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > I'd explained in another thread this week why this patch is invalid, > > and I've gone ahead and reverted. > > > > We agreed there is a defect here, what about the attached fix? > > Looks good, if something bad happened in ap_read_request() we already > have responded with ap_send_error_response(). > > What may be missing is reporting SERVER_BUSY_WRITE (with the > partial/bad request) in ap_send_error_response(), and then we'd > probably don't need to pass r for SERVER_BUSY_LOG in the error paths > of ap_read_request(). > AIUI, at that point in the code, if there was an error response it was already sent, the other paths appear to be simple disconnection states with no further logging or socket activity, other than forcing lingering close... perhaps. In the lingering close phase, we do update the score status, so I don't think that needs to be done in these alternate code paths here.
