[haiku-appserver] Re: deadlock
- From: Adi Oanca <adioanca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-appserver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:29:20 +0300
Hi,
Can someone handle this please?
Thanks,
Adi.
Adi Oanca wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Stefano Ceccherini wrote:
>
>>> That's what I love about this team!!! When I get short >of ideas, or
>>>when I'm in trouble there is _always_ someone to come with a >nice
>>>solution! :-) Thanks JB.
>>
>>Thanks but it is just what beos does, it isn't an original idea of mine :)
>
>
> Don't care. You're the one who investigated and solved this problem. :-)
>
>
>>> You are right, this solution is _much_ smoother than >what we currently
>>>have in the tree. This means, some things must be changed in
>>>BApplication so that when sending something to the server a
>>>_BAppServerLink_ object should be created instead of locking >the looper.
>>
>>
>>Actually, we already use BAppServerLink in BApplication and in the
>
> > various classes (BCursor, etc.) to handle communication.
>
> I know. And it's good it's in BPrivate namespace.
>
>
>>So I think we have just to change a bit the implementation of BAppServerLink:
>
> > instead of locking be_app, it has to acquire its own (static) lock.
>
>>Does this sound right ? Am I missing something ? Stephan ? Darkwyrm ? Axel ?
>>:)
>
>
> Yes, it does. I had a quick look in BApplication and found only one
> place where a change is needed: BApplication's destructor.
> I also had a look at BAppServerLink and saw that for each instance it
> looks the looper and creates a second reply port. That be_app->Lock() should
> disappear and instead of creating a reply port, BApplication's reply port
> should be used. Of course let's not forget about that static lock.
> In all, this is what I propose:
>
> BAppServerLink::BAppServerLink(void)
> : BPortLink()
> {
> if (be_app)
> {
> mainServerLock->Lock();
> SetSendPort(be_app->fServerFrom);
> SetReplyPort(be_app->fServerTo);
> }
> }
>
> BAppServerLink::~BAppServerLink()
> {
> if (be_app)
> mainServerLock->Unlock();
> }
>
> status_t BAppServerLink::FlushWithReply(int32 *code)
> {
> status_t err;
>
> - err = Attach<port_id>(receiver);
> - if (err < B_OK)
> - return err;
>
> err = Flush();
> if (err < B_OK)
> return err;
>
> return GetNextReply(code);
> }
>
> Unfortunately some code inside app_server must be changed. That second
> reply port was attached to the message.
>
>
> bye,
> Adi.
>
>
Other related posts:
