search for: source_find_mount

...oes this have any effect at all that isn't handled by setting max-listeners to zero? 3) In the multilevel fallbacks patch, you've added a comment saying "Likely safe to do since there can only be one thread, ever", along with some static local variables, in the source_find_mount() function. I'm not sure why you said this, it's clearly incorrect: the source_* functions are called from many different threads, and this is clearly not safe. This is easily fixed, though, by passing the neccesary variables recursively, and splitting the function into two. I&...

..., by name, it will not prevent listening to it as a fallback. That was the idea. > 3) In the multilevel fallbacks patch, you've added a comment > saying > "Likely safe to do since there can only be one thread, ever", along with > some > static local variables, in the source_find_mount() function. I'm not sure > why > you said this, it's clearly incorrect: the source_* functions are called > from > many different threads, and this is clearly not safe. This is easily > fixed, > though, by passing the neccesary variables recursively, and splitting the >...

On Sat, 2004-01-17 at 19:31, iceuse@kezako.net wrote: > Thanks, > Karl, do you plan to integrate this in your icecast-kh release? The idea is to put the the changes I've done into CVS. That way you get the best of both worlds, there's nothing conflicting AFAIK. karl. <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage:

...in your release, but also I'm not sure about locking or not the main source before moving the clients : if(source->fallback_override && source->fallback_mount) { /* get fallback source */ avl_tree_rlock (global.source_tree); source_t *fallback_source = source_find_mount (source->fallback_mount); avl_tree_unlock (global.source_tree); if (fallback_source) { INFO2 ("passing %d listeners to %s", fallback_source->mount,source->listeners ); /* Do we need to lock the current source? */ thread_mutex_l...

...oes anyone else have any opinions on this? <p>> > > 3) In the multilevel fallbacks patch, you've added a comment > > saying > > "Likely safe to do since there can only be one thread, ever", along with > > some > > static local variables, in the source_find_mount() function. I'm not sure > > why > > you said this, it's clearly incorrect: the source_* functions are called > > from > > many different threads, and this is clearly not safe. This is easily > > fixed, > > though, by passing the neccesary variables recur...

...a list (as > > we said before) to store the clients we could efficiently do the service of > > the clients and, in the same time, delete the completely served client. > > > > ---------------------------------------- > > > > Can someone explain us the strategy of source_find_mount, and particularly > > the aim of that line : > > > > ... > > node = global.source_tree->root->right; > > ... > > > > Why not using source_compare_sources ? > > > > ---------------------------------------- > > > > Where does the...

On Tuesday 02 December 2003 01:23, Melanie wrote: > Hello, > > this is the first patch, it implements some basic multilevel fallback > handling logic, the time window and the no mount option. > > New options are possible within an <mount> section: > > <fallback-override>1</fallback-override> > > This will allow a source connecting to a mount point to

...with invalid or missing password", uri); + INFO1("Source (%s) attempted to login with invalid or missing password, %s", uri, client->con->ip); client_send_401(client); return; } @@ -622,7 +622,7 @@ avl_tree_rlock(global.source_tree); if (source_find_mount(uri) != NULL) { avl_tree_unlock(global.source_tree); - INFO1("Source tried to log in as %s, but mountpoint is already used", uri); + INFO1("Source tried to log in as %s, but mountpoint is already used, %s", uri, client->con->ip); client_send...