From 16bd6e278f3071507771a49bac3ed1ccc5f0123b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: phk Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 14:26:32 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] redo the purge.list function with proper locking git-svn-id: svn+ssh://projects.linpro.no/svn/varnish/trunk@3514 d4fa192b-c00b-0410-8231-f00ffab90ce4 --- varnish-cache/bin/varnishd/cache_ban.c | 35 ++++++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/varnish-cache/bin/varnishd/cache_ban.c b/varnish-cache/bin/varnishd/cache_ban.c index 2db21fea..1c0466d8 100644 --- a/varnish-cache/bin/varnishd/cache_ban.c +++ b/varnish-cache/bin/varnishd/cache_ban.c @@ -499,27 +499,30 @@ ccf_purge_hash(struct cli *cli, const char * const *av, void *priv) static void ccf_purge_list(struct cli *cli, const char * const *av, void *priv) { - struct ban *b0; + struct ban *b; struct ban_test *bt; (void)av; (void)priv; - /* - * XXX: Strictly speaking, this loop traversal is not lock-safe - * XXX: because we might inspect the last ban while it gets - * XXX: destroyed. To properly fix this, we would need to either - * XXX: hold the lock over the entire loop, or grab refcounts - * XXX: under lock for each element of the list. - * XXX: We do neither, and hope for the best. - */ - for (b0 = ban_start; b0 != NULL; b0 = VTAILQ_NEXT(b0, list)) { - if (b0->refcount == 0 && VTAILQ_NEXT(b0, list) == NULL) - break; - VTAILQ_FOREACH(bt, &b0->tests, list) - cli_out(cli, "%5u %d \"%s\"\n", - b0->refcount, b0->flags, - bt->test); + + Lck_Lock(&ban_mtx); + VTAILQ_LAST(&ban_head, banhead)->refcount++; + Lck_Unlock(&ban_mtx); + + VTAILQ_FOREACH(b, &ban_head, list) { + bt = VTAILQ_FIRST(&b->tests); + cli_out(cli, "%5u %4s\t%s\n", + b->refcount, b->flags ? "Gone" : "", bt->test); + do { + bt = VTAILQ_NEXT(bt, list); + if (bt != NULL) + cli_out(cli, "\t\t%s\n", bt->test); + } while (bt != NULL); } + + Lck_Lock(&ban_mtx); + VTAILQ_LAST(&ban_head, banhead)->refcount--; + Lck_Unlock(&ban_mtx); } static struct cli_proto ban_cmds[] = { -- 2.39.5