[720] in arla-drinkers
Re: bsd-xfs, signaling to break a wait
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Love)
Mon Mar 29 02:25:33 1999
From owner-arla-drinkers@stacken.kth.se Mon Mar 29 07:25:33 1999
Return-Path: <owner-arla-drinkers@stacken.kth.se>
Delivered-To: arla-drinkers-mtg@bloom-picayune.mit.edu
Received: (qmail 10366 invoked from network); 29 Mar 1999 07:25:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO sundance.stacken.kth.se) (130.237.234.41)
by bloom-picayune.mit.edu with SMTP; 29 Mar 1999 07:25:32 -0000
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by sundance.stacken.kth.se (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA09438
for arla-drinkers-list; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:17:29 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from elixir.e.kth.se (elixir.e.kth.se [130.237.48.5])
by sundance.stacken.kth.se (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA09434
for <arla-drinkers@stacken.kth.se>; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:17:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from robert.e.kth.se (IDENT:1073744992@robert.e.kth.se [130.237.48.106])
by elixir.e.kth.se (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id JAA20195;
Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:17:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from lha@localhost)
by robert.e.kth.se (8.9.2/8.9.2) id JAA01605;
Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:17:23 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Love <lha@stacken.kth.se>
To: Robert Watson <robert@cyrus.watson.org>
Cc: arla-drinkers@stacken.kth.se
Subject: Re: bsd-xfs, signaling to break a wait
References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990328090652.6339C-100000@fledge.watson.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 29 Mar 1999 09:17:23 +0200
In-Reply-To: Robert Watson's message of Sun, 28 Mar 1999 09:14:17 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <amaewwvk70.fsf@robert.e.kth.se>
Lines: 23
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.2
Sender: owner-arla-drinkers@stacken.kth.se
Precedence: bulk
Robert Watson <robert@cyrus.watson.org> writes:
> Arla Folk,
>
> I've been playing with XFS some over the last week or so. I ran into the
> following behavior:
I assume your're using the BSD xfs.
I see what you are trying to say, but since all (t)sleepings are done
by each separate process and the sleepings are independent from each other.
(see xfs_message.c:xfs_message_rpc()).
When I tried it on my fbsd2.2.x host I hade to press C-c twice for some odd
reson I don't have time to figure out now. But it worked independely in
what order I killed them.
Would help if you could give us a testcase that (didn't) worked.
We do ignore SIGIO during the rpc, but that is only because emacs
tab-completion breaks if we don't.
Love
