[Openais] Re: just looked at some of the openais code, have some comments

Steven Dake sdake at mvista.com
Tue Jul 6 12:27:54 PDT 2004

Thanks Chris

I committed this patch.  I agree the activate poll design is not
pretty.  It is possible this can be done with two fd's in a pipe as
well, that that consumes alot more resources.

In one case the activate poll is needed by AMF in the current design, to
dispatch async messages on the same fd as sync messages are being
delivered to.


On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 12:11, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Steven Dake wrote:
> > A new handle cannot be taken from the handle array if the state is
> > "pending" it can only be taken if it is "empty".  So this keeps handles
> > that are still referenced from being reused.
> Okay, makes sense.  As long as anyone has a handle, the refcount won't be zero, 
> so the handle can't get re-used.
> > I'd like to get rid of the refcount and mutex from the instance
> > structure, since its more of a handle management issue (that the handle
> > management functions care about), then something the user of the handle
> > management APIs care about.
> I guess that conceptually it is the handle that is being refcounted.  Okay, 
> makes sense.  And it reduces the amount of locking necessary, which is nice.
> > Take a look at the latest patch it should embody most of your ideas.
> Just looked at it, I don't see any major gotchas.  I still don't really like the 
> activatePoll() thing, but I don't have any good ideas how to replace it at the 
> moment.
> I notice you fixed the clm comment too...
> I think you should submit it.  Any further changes would be easier with this as 
> a base.
> Chris

More information about the Openais mailing list