[svn-commits] mmichelson: branch 1.6.0 r109228 - in /branches/1.6.0: ./ main/utils.c

[SVN commits to the Digium repositories]

Author: mmichelson
Date: Mon Mar 17 17:07:29 2008
New Revision: 109228

URL: http://svn.digium.com/view/asterisk?view=rev&rev=109228
Log:
Merged revisions 109227 via svnmerge from 
https://origsvn.digium.com/svn/asterisk/trunk

................
r109227 | mmichelson | 2008-03-17 17:06:44 -0500 (Mon, 17 Mar 2008) | 20 lines

Merged revisions 109226 via svnmerge from 
https://origsvn.digium.com/svn/asterisk/branches/1.4

........
r109226 | mmichelson | 2008-03-17 17:05:49 -0500 (Mon, 17 Mar 2008) | 12 lines

Fix a logic flaw in the code that stores lock info which is displayed
via the "core show locks" command. The idea behind this section of code was
to remove the previous lock from the list if it was a trylock that had failed.
Unfortunately, instead of checking the status of the previous lock, we were referencing
the index immediately following the previous lock in the lock_info->locks array. 
The result of this problem, under the right circumstances, was that the lock which 
we currently in the process of attempting to acquire could "overwrite" the previous lock 
which was acquired. While this does not in any way affect typical operation, it *could*
lead to misleading "core show locks" output.



........

................

Modified:
    branches/1.6.0/   (props changed)
    branches/1.6.0/main/utils.c

Propchange: branches/1.6.0/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Binary property 'trunk-merged' - no diff available.

Modified: branches/1.6.0/main/utils.c
URL: http://svn.digium.com/view/asterisk/branches/1.6.0/main/utils.c?view=diff&rev=109228&r1=109227&r2=109228
==============================================================================
--- branches/1.6.0/main/utils.c (original)
+++ branches/1.6.0/main/utils.c Mon Mar 17 17:07:29 2008
@@ -611,7 +611,7 @@
 		return;
 	}
 
-	if (i && lock_info->locks[i].pending == -1) {
+	if (i && lock_info->locks[i-1].pending == -1) {
 		/* The last lock on the list was one that this thread tried to lock but
 		 * failed at doing so.  It has now moved on to something else, so remove
 		 * the old lock from the list. */