X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX18tUsdEf4K1wJ3BIzYP5oj9 Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 14:33:06 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: YA call for snapshot testing Message-ID: <20120122193306.GA12886@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20120119195244 DOT GA763 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20120121181804 DOT GA26978 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1B6F71 DOT 8070407 AT shaddybaddah DOT name> <20120122054719 DOT GB28773 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20120122055300 DOT GB657 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1BBB0F DOT 2020009 AT gmail DOT com> <20120122165705 DOT GA10996 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F1C5F56 DOT 8070208 AT gmail DOT com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F1C5F56.8070208@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 08:11:18PM +0100, marco atzeri wrote: >On 1/22/2012 5:57 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 08:30:23AM +0100, marco atzeri wrote: > >>> I saw the problem in erratic way also before running updatedb. >>> But it is very evanescent and usually linked on how find is called. >> >> Could you try the latest snapshot? > >snapshots 20120122 07:28:45 seems to have solved the issue Looks like my guess was correct. I added refence counting to Cygwin's inaptly-named fhandler structures recently to work around a problem where a signal handler closed an fd while it was in the middle of a read. This caused the memory associated with an fd to be deleted only when the last thing referencing it was done with it. The very odd thing was that my implementation seemed to work right from the beginning. That has made me wonder what I got wrong. What I got wrong was the dup*() family of functions. If you dup a fd its reference counter was not reset so the memory associated with it was not deleted. Duh. Thanks for confirming. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple