X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org From: "Williams, David" To: "cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:10:41 -0700 Subject: RE: Problem with cygserver and sysv message queues: msgsnd() blocks forever. Message-ID: References: <20080430105846 DOT GO23852 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20080430185747 DOT GX23852 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> In-Reply-To: <20080430185747.GX23852@calimero.vinschen.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id m3UNBHfY004794 Corinna, I can report that the patch works perfectly. Both with the examples and with our original application program that brought the bug to our attention. Dave Williams -----Original Message----- From: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com [mailto:cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 11:58 AM To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Problem with cygserver and sysv message queues: msgsnd() blocks forever. On Apr 30 10:16, Williams, David wrote: > Yes, I can patch and build the sources, and will test the patch. I > can see that this will work, and is probably the least disruptive > way to fix it. I'm bothered a little bit by the fixed timeout value, > although this is an exceptional case, which shouldn't occur in a > properly tuned and managed system. I'm not that concerned. A fixed value of 50 will interrupt a maximum of 20 times per second. The hz value in BSD is usually higher. I think 50 is a good compromise. > My thoughts for a fix were centered around replacing the msqptr > ident parameter with a resource specific identifier that would > allow freeing a resource by one queue to wake another. However, > such a fix would require much regression testing, and STILL might > need a timeout like this as an ultimate safety net. Besides, we > likely want to continue tracking the BSD source. There's surely some better way to solve this problem but if there's an upstream fix, I'd like to use it. My goal is to keep the code as much upstream centered as possible. > I'm currently building and testing using the cygwin-1.5.25-12 release > tarball. Would it be more helpful for me to pull the CVS head down > to test this? Shouldn't matter, actually. There's no difference in the message queue code between 1.5.25 and CVS HEAD. However, the bugfix will only go into CVS HEAD. If you need this bugfix desperately, please maintain your local version for now. > Thanks for the quick reply. I'm glad to be of some help. You're welcome. Thanks for the debugging effort and the testcase. You almost did all the work yourself already, I just had to look what upstream is doing about it :) I'll check this in in a couple of minutes. Thanks again, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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/