[Keeping httpd list here only] On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Stefan Eissing <stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de> wrote: > > So, apr_p*alloc() calls would be thread-safe if a mutex is set in > the underlying allocator? Hmm, at what cost? would be my question.
I also fear that it would be costly when not needed (e.g. request's pool). Because yes, the allocator is inherited from the parent pool if none is specified at creation time, and hence with this commit every child pool of ptrans will have a mutexed allocator. > > In regard to thread safety of apr_allocator, there is still something > I do not understand. Observations: > > 1. When I remove the own allocator in h2_mplx, so it inherits the > now protected one from the master connection, all runs fine. I'm not sure this dedicated allocator is needed, mplx seems to race only with itself on ptrans (master->pool), but I may miss something. > 2. When I remove the own allocator from the slave connections also, > in h2_conn, so that slave conns also use the protected allocator > from the master conn, Hmm, rather the allocator from mplx->pool (since slave connections are children of mplx), right? > things break. E.g. strange behaviour up > to crashes under load. Is it with or without this commit? Also with 1. + 2., or 2. alone?
