Message-Id: <200311100220.hAA2KZZQ002605@delorie.com> 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: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:20:53 +0800 From: "zhouxin" To: "cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" Subject: Re: Process hang(100% CPU Usage) when concurrent calling select(),cygwin1.5.5-1 WinXP/Win2000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yeah,it seems all ok! >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/ > > >. -- 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/