Or maybe no default to avoid confusion?
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Derek Dagit <der...@oath.com.invalid> wrote: > I think that would be better, because it's consistent with the current API. > > Sorry if I wasn't clear on that before. > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 4:07 PM, Walt Karas <wka...@oath.com.invalid> wrote: > >> So is the upshot that the mutex param to the constructor should >> default to nullptr? >> >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Derek Dagit <der...@oath.com.invalid> >> wrote: >> > A continuation's Mutex is also used for certain API functions, like >> > TSHostLookup: >> > >> > https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/ >> developer-guide/api/functions/TSHostLookup.en.html >> > >> > But you do not always need them. >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:48 PM, Alan Carroll < >> > solidwallofc...@oath.com.invalid> wrote: >> > >> >> Yes. I have seen reference count numbers in the high teens for some >> >> mutexes. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Walt Karas <wka...@oath.com.invalid> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > So it's possible that two different continuations may be sharing a >> single >> >> > mutex? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Alan Carroll >> >> > <solidwallofc...@oath.com.invalid> wrote: >> >> > > Walt - I think Derek is commenting stylistically, that if no Mutex >> is >> >> the >> >> > > default for the C API, then it should be the default for the C++ as >> >> well. >> >> > > >> >> > > What about a user conversion to TSCont in addition to an explicit >> >> method? >> >> > > If you could, writing this up as a Sphinx API doc would be cool. >> >> > > >> >> > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Alan Carroll < >> >> solidwallofc...@oath.com> >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > >> Indirectly. What's stored in the Continuation is a shared pointer >> to >> >> the >> >> > >> Mutex. That shared pointer is destructed by TSContDestroy which >> may in >> >> > turn >> >> > >> destruct the Mutex (or not, if there are still references to it). >> >> > >> >> >> > >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:56 PM, Walt Karas >> <wka...@oath.com.invalid >> >> > >> >> > >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> > >>> I'm pretty sure TSContDestroy() also destroys any mutex for the >> >> > >>> continuation. (Per our other discussion, I got exasperated >> trying to >> >> > >>> make sure of this looking through the code with just vi.) >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Derek >> > > > > -- > Derek
