Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 15:51:43 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Process hang(100% CPU Usage) when concurrent calling select(),cygwin1.5.5-1 WinXP/Win2000 Message-ID: <20031108205143.GA5369@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <3FABBDD4 DOT 6090900 AT hekimian DOT com> <20031107182429 DOT GA3490 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031107182429.GA3490@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 01:24:29PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:44:20AM -0500, Joe Buehler wrote: >>zhouxin wrote: >>>If the udp worker's count greater than 18,some thread's select() hang >>>and process take 100% cpu: >> >>Interestingly, there is a static pool of 18 threads internally before >>switching to dynamically created threads. So there may be some problem >>related to the dynamically allocated threads code. > >Hmm. Interesting observation. I took a stab at fixing a couple of >obvious problems in the thread overflow code. It seems like it might >have solved the problem. > >There will be a new snapshot available in an hour or so at: > >http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ > >Thanks for the test case, btw. So... did the snapshot fix the problem? cf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/