Hi,

Tomas Volf <[email protected]> skribis:

>>> I have no idea how Shepherd works internally (and much less how Fibers
>>> work), so maybe this comment is completely off, but this seems
>>> suspicious.  Should this lambda not get the wake up time as an argument,
>>> instead of calling get-internal-real-time to get the "now"?
>>
>> Yes, it would probably be nicer, but it wouldn’t make much of a
>> difference here (and it’s not related to the bug: the bug shows that we
>> sleep longer than asked for).
>
> I am not sure this is correct.  What the bug shows is that the callback
> is called later then expected.  We do not know how long the sleep was.
> Am I missing something?

The bug is that it slept longer than expected, not that it was late, if
you see what I mean.

>> Maybe this:
>>
>>   (define max-delay
>>     ;; Time after which we consider that we missed the deadline.  Tolerate a
>>     ;; slight drift, which can happen occasionally.
>>     (max (min (/ seconds 10.) 120) 2))
>
> That should work, yeah.  At least as a temporary measure. :)

Heh, agreed.  Pushed as 7a7b4e16f9697c4822b7693e63cc4ba0ace134a2.

> Few additional data-points: The timers I have scheduled for almost 24h
> in the future fired exactly on time.  As for the kerberos-log-in-refresh
> timer, twice it fired within the 2 seconds (12:00:01), once outside
> (12:00:02).

OK.

> I was thinking about this some more, and the right solution here
> probably is to use netlink to listen for ACPI events, the same way acpid
> does.  That should provide reliable information about the suspend and
> resume events.

Sounds like a good idea (though it’s a bit annoying to depend on
guile-netlink and low-level details).

Another thing I had in mind was to use an elogind hook so that shepherd
would know when we’re suspending; this is necessary for other things
such as locking LUKS devices on suspend.  But that’s a change for 1.1.x.

Thanks,
Ludo’.



Reply via email to