Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 06:54:53PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote: Yelling at people won't solve the problem, nor will trying to hold the project to ransom. These are things that you need to take into consideration. You can take over Gcc and Binutils maintenance at any time. I doubt you or any k00l d00d kernel hak0rs will step away from kernel development. My attempts to find anyone that wants to help maintain these contrib bits (and have the skills) have turned up zilch. Sorry you feel I am holding the project to ransom. But dealing with a 3 month old cycle of breakages just isn't in the least bit fun or even mildly enjoyable. Of course you mentioned you gave your Alpha away, so I know you aren't even trying to run FreeBSD on multiple platforms. So maybe you should keep that in mind when seeing the frustration of those that do. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010713 07:00] wrote: On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:49:25 +0900, Seigo Tanimura tanimura said: Alfred Certain operations, such as: Alfred kq = (struct kqueue *)fp-f_data; Alfred should not really require that the file be locked, it's implicitly frozen Alfred at creation time (i think) Seigo Yes. Only one exception beats off everything. union_dircheck() in fs/unionfs/union_subr.c may replace f_data with a new vnode. That code really scared me, but on careful inspection, the f_data is actually protected by the vnode exclusive lock from concurrant getdirentries() calls. (getdirentries() calls union_dircheck()) The code is still troublesome for mixing read() and getdirentries() at the same time, but since union mounts are rare we should leave it along and possibly revisit this later. My opinion is that you never need a lock for an assignment, unless that assignment spans multiple dependant operations or is dependant on some pre-condition, cases: /* no lock */ foo-a = 5; /* needs lock */ if (foo-b) foo-a = 5; /* might need lock to protect agianst inconsistant view */ foo-a = 5; foo-b = c; -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010711 19:08] wrote: The patch and the results of build test are now on the web page. The discussion of ktrace(2) problem does not cover the solution of BSD/OS, so it needs updating. Here's some more commentary and a pointer to some work done. This is just about completely file locking related, however I do have a question about PGRP locking, in a certain part you may have to lock two pgrps, how do you deal with deadlock? getvnode() should FHOLD returned fp. should actually be turned into holdvnode (implicit VREF) to do reference holding. (later) ibcs2_getdents(), ibcs2_statfs(), __acl_get_fd, __acl_set_fd, __acl_aclcheck_fd(), __acl_delete_fd() depends on getvnode doing FHOLD, once done needs fdrop() added Certain operations, such as: kq = (struct kqueue *)fp-f_data; should not really require that the file be locked, it's implicitly frozen at creation time (i think) Work is here, it's a diff relative to FreeBSD-current + your patch. http://sneakerz.org/~bright/pg_mine.diff thanks, -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 04:25:04 -0500, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Alfred This is just about completely file locking related, Alfred however I do have a question about PGRP locking, in Alfred a certain part you may have to lock two pgrps, how do you Alfred deal with deadlock? Lock the session to which the pgrps belong first, then lock the pgrps. AFAIK, there are only two places to lock two pgrps, namely enterpgrp() and fixjobc() with an argument 'entering' set to nonzero. In both cases, either the pgrps belong to the same session or one of the pgrps belongs to a brand-new session with no other pgrps. Alfred getvnode() Alfred should FHOLD returned fp. Alfred ibcs2_getdents(), ibcs2_statfs(), __acl_get_fd, __acl_set_fd, Alfred __acl_aclcheck_fd(), __acl_delete_fd() Alfred depends on getvnode doing FHOLD, once done needs fdrop() added Aaugh, I finished that work two hours ago :) Alfred getvnode() Alfred should actually be turned into holdvnode (implicit VREF) to do Alfred reference holding. (later) Fine. Alfred Certain operations, such as: Alfred kq = (struct kqueue *)fp-f_data; Alfred should not really require that the file be locked, it's implicitly frozen Alfred at creation time (i think) Yes. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:49:25 +0900, Seigo Tanimura tanimura said: Alfred Certain operations, such as: Alfred kq = (struct kqueue *)fp-f_data; Alfred should not really require that the file be locked, it's implicitly frozen Alfred at creation time (i think) Seigo Yes. Only one exception beats off everything. union_dircheck() in fs/unionfs/union_subr.c may replace f_data with a new vnode. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010712 01:45] wrote: * Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010712 01:42] wrote: * Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010711 19:08] wrote: The patch and the results of build test are now on the web page. The discussion of ktrace(2) problem does not cover the solution of BSD/OS, so it needs updating. I'm just reviewing the file stuff, I have a number of updates mainly in the areas of needing FFIND_HOLD/fdrop rather than just a simple FFIND. getvnode(p-p_fd, args-fd, fp); I'm quite sure should implicitly do a FHOLD operation on the returned struct file, i don't see this, at least not in linux_getdents() (compat/linux/linux_file.c). Or at least an fhold needs to be done before relasing the lock on the struct file. Furthermore, all the fo_* functions should not be calling FHOLD themselves, the fhold needs to have been done by whomever calls them to make sure that the 'fp' doesn't disapear out from under the fo_ function. -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 01:44:44 -0500, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Alfred * Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010712 01:42] wrote: * Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010711 19:08] wrote: The patch and the results of build test are now on the web page. The discussion of ktrace(2) problem does not cover the solution of BSD/OS, so it needs updating. I'm just reviewing the file stuff, I have a number of updates mainly in the areas of needing FFIND_HOLD/fdrop rather than just a simple FFIND. getvnode(p-p_fd, args-fd, fp); I'm quite sure should implicitly do a FHOLD operation on the returned struct file, i don't see this, at least not in linux_getdents() (compat/linux/linux_file.c). Alfred Or at least an fhold needs to be done before relasing the lock Alfred on the struct file. Some functions modify a file descriptor, while others do not. At that point, what we need is a pair of FFIND and FFIND_LOCK. Both of them hold a file descriptor. FFIND_LOCK locks a file descriptor, while FFIND does not. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010711 19:08] wrote:
The patch and the results of build test are now on the web page.
The discussion of ktrace(2) problem does not cover the solution of
BSD/OS, so it needs updating.
Right now I'm only reviewing the file part and
I'm only up to 'sys/i386/ibcs2/ibcs2_misc.c' in the diff.
Here's a diff against your version and some comments so far:
svr4_sys_putmsg
svr4_sys_getmsg
should not use FFIND, needs FFIND_HOLD
fdesc_lookup
probably should FFIND_HOLD to make sure the file doesn't go away.
locking filedesc is probably not sufficient
ibcs2_ioctl
needs to be converted to FFIND_HOLD like linux's ioctl
Basically, I'm pretty sure you need to FFIND_HOLD a lot more
than you're doing in order to protect against shared file
descriptor tables getting corrupted.
diff --exclude=CVS -ur ./alpha/osf1/osf1_misc.c /usr/src/sys/alpha/osf1/osf1_misc.c
--- ./alpha/osf1/osf1_misc.cThu Jul 12 08:04:26 2001
+++ /usr/src/sys/alpha/osf1/osf1_misc.c Thu Jul 12 06:21:21 2001
@@ -670,11 +670,12 @@
struct osf1_stat oub;
int error;
- FFIND(fp, p, SCARG(uap, fd));
+ FFIND_HOLD(fp, p, uap-fd);
if (fp == NULL)
return (EBADF);
error = fo_stat(fp, ub, p);
+ fdrop(fp, p);
cvtstat2osf1(ub, oub);
if (error == 0)
error = copyout((caddr_t)oub, (caddr_t)SCARG(uap, sb),
diff --exclude=CVS -ur ./alpha/osf1/osf1_mount.c /usr/src/sys/alpha/osf1/osf1_mount.c
--- ./alpha/osf1/osf1_mount.c Thu Jul 12 08:04:26 2001
+++ /usr/src/sys/alpha/osf1/osf1_mount.cThu Jul 12 06:20:50 2001
@@ -154,7 +154,7 @@
struct statfs *sp;
struct osf1_statfs osfs;
- error = getvnode(p-p_fd, SCARG(uap, fd), fp);
+ error = getvnode(p-p_fd, uap-fd, fp);
if (error)
return (error);
mp = ((struct vnode *)fp-f_data)-v_mount;
diff --exclude=CVS -ur ./compat/linux/linux_file.c
/usr/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_file.c
--- ./compat/linux/linux_file.c Thu Jul 12 08:04:27 2001
+++ /usr/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_file.c Thu Jul 12 06:46:27 2001
@@ -139,11 +139,12 @@
SESS_LEADER(p) !(p-p_flag P_CONTROLT)) {
struct file *fp;
- FFIND(fp, p, p-p_retval[0]);
+ FFIND_HOLD(fp, p, p-p_retval[0]);
SESS_UNLOCK(p-p_session);
PROC_UNLOCK(p);
if (fp-f_type == DTYPE_VNODE)
fo_ioctl(fp, TIOCSCTTY, (caddr_t) 0, p);
+ fdrop(fp, p);
} else {
SESS_UNLOCK(p-p_session);
PROC_UNLOCK(p);
@@ -309,15 +310,19 @@
* significant effect for pipes (SIGIO is not delivered for
* pipes under Linux-2.2.35 at least).
*/
- FFIND(fp, p, args-fd);
+ FFIND_HOLD(fp, p, args-fd);
if (fp == NULL)
return EBADF;
- if (fp-f_type == DTYPE_PIPE)
+ if (fp-f_type == DTYPE_PIPE) {
+ fdrop(fp, p);
return EINVAL;
+ }
fcntl_args.cmd = F_SETOWN;
fcntl_args.arg = args-arg;
- return fcntl(p, fcntl_args);
+ error = fcntl(p, fcntl_args);
+ fdrop(fp, p);
+ return (error);
}
return EINVAL;
}
diff --exclude=CVS -ur ./compat/linux/linux_ioctl.c
/usr/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_ioctl.c
--- ./compat/linux/linux_ioctl.cThu Jul 12 08:04:27 2001
+++ /usr/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_ioctl.c Thu Jul 12 07:52:31 2001
@@ -1437,10 +1437,12 @@
printf(ARGS(ioctl, %d, %04lx, *), args-fd, args-cmd);
#endif
- FFIND_LOCK(fp, p, args-fd);
- if (fp == NULL || (fp-f_flag (FREAD|FWRITE)) == 0) {
- if (fp != NULL)
- FILE_UNLOCK(fp);
+ FFIND_HOLD(fp, p, args-fd);
+ if (fp == NULL)
+ return (EBADF);
+ FILE_LOCK(fp);
+ if ((fp-f_flag (FREAD|FWRITE)) == 0) {
+ FILE_UNLOCK(fp);
return (EBADF);
}
FILE_UNLOCK(fp);
@@ -1451,9 +1453,11 @@
if (cmd = he-low cmd = he-high) {
error = (*he-func)(p, args);
if (error != ENOIOCTL)
+ fdrop(fp, p);
return (error);
}
}
+ fdrop(fp, p);
printf(linux: 'ioctl' fd=%d, cmd=0x%x ('%c',%d) not implemented\n,
args-fd, (int)(args-cmd 0x),
diff --exclude=CVS -ur ./compat/linux/linux_stats.c
/usr/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_stats.c
--- ./compat/linux/linux_stats.cThu Jul 12 08:04:27 2001
+++ /usr/src/sys/compat/linux/linux_stats.c Thu Jul 12 06:12:11 2001
@@ -218,11 +218,12 @@
printf(ARGS(newfstat, %d, *), args-fd);
#endif
- FFIND(fp, p, args-fd);
+ FFIND_HOLD(fp, p, args-fd);
if (fp == NULL)
return (EBADF);
error = fo_stat(fp, buf, p);
+ fdrop(fp, p);
if (!error)
error = newstat_copyout(buf, args-buf);
diff
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010711 19:08] wrote: The patch and the results of build test are now on the web page. The discussion of ktrace(2) problem does not cover the solution of BSD/OS, so it needs updating. I'm just reviewing the file stuff, I have a number of updates mainly in the areas of needing FFIND_HOLD/fdrop rather than just a simple FFIND. getvnode(p-p_fd, args-fd, fp); I'm quite sure should implicitly do a FHOLD operation on the returned struct file, i don't see this, at least not in linux_getdents() (compat/linux/linux_file.c). How can I present you a delta in a good way? -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010712 01:42] wrote: * Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010711 19:08] wrote: The patch and the results of build test are now on the web page. The discussion of ktrace(2) problem does not cover the solution of BSD/OS, so it needs updating. I'm just reviewing the file stuff, I have a number of updates mainly in the areas of needing FFIND_HOLD/fdrop rather than just a simple FFIND. getvnode(p-p_fd, args-fd, fp); I'm quite sure should implicitly do a FHOLD operation on the returned struct file, i don't see this, at least not in linux_getdents() (compat/linux/linux_file.c). Or at least an fhold needs to be done before relasing the lock on the struct file. -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 10:44:21 +0900, Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Alfred I'm also quite sure that you can't call the ktrace functions with Alfred any mutexes held so the code is doing to need some help, basically Alfred the trick in trapsig() and postsig() is to generate the ktrace Alfred IO after the locks have been dropped, this means somehow caching Alfred the info sent to ktrace where it's currently called, and calling Alfred it later with the cached info after the locks are dropped. Seigo We can cache ktrace information into struct proc and mark the Seigo existence of cache in p_traceflag. Then we send the information to Seigo ktrace upon returning from trapsignal() or CURSIG(), or in sigexit(). The problem has turned out to be even worse. msleep() and cv_*wait*() might receive a mutex held by curproc. As we cannot release the mutex to sleep in ktrwrite() during msleep() or cv_*wait*(), it is also necessary to cache information sent to ktrcsw(). Is it not feasible to examine the existence of cached ktrcsw() information upon every single call of msleep() and cv_*wait*() in order to flush the cached information. Instead of that, we should watch for release of mutexes. When a process no longer holds any mutexes except for Giant, it is safe to flush cached information to ktrace. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010711 01:39] wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 10:44:21 +0900, Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Alfred I'm also quite sure that you can't call the ktrace functions with Alfred any mutexes held so the code is doing to need some help, basically Alfred the trick in trapsig() and postsig() is to generate the ktrace Alfred IO after the locks have been dropped, this means somehow caching Alfred the info sent to ktrace where it's currently called, and calling Alfred it later with the cached info after the locks are dropped. Seigo We can cache ktrace information into struct proc and mark the Seigo existence of cache in p_traceflag. Then we send the information to Seigo ktrace upon returning from trapsignal() or CURSIG(), or in sigexit(). The problem has turned out to be even worse. msleep() and cv_*wait*() might receive a mutex held by curproc. As we cannot release the mutex to sleep in ktrwrite() during msleep() or cv_*wait*(), it is also necessary to cache information sent to ktrcsw(). Is it not feasible to examine the existence of cached ktrcsw() information upon every single call of msleep() and cv_*wait*() in order to flush the cached information. Instead of that, we should watch for release of mutexes. When a process no longer holds any mutexes except for Giant, it is safe to flush cached information to ktrace. Yes, it's pretty gross. :( -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:20:44 -0500, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I'm going to be giving this code some testing, not that you have to wait for me to finish, but it seems like no one has stepped forward to review this. I'd like to see it committed, so either go ahead or wait for my review if it makes you more comfortable. Since I was working on the filedesc stuff I'll take a shot at reviewing it, by way of the diff it looks somewhat ok, I just want to make sure you're getting the fhold/fdrop stuff right. Alfred There's a merged diff here: Alfred http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/pg_fd2.diff It is rather hard for me to dig up what you merged out of that patch. Could you please give me unmerged one? Thanks. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010710 03:46] wrote: On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:20:44 -0500, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I'm going to be giving this code some testing, not that you have to wait for me to finish, but it seems like no one has stepped forward to review this. I'd like to see it committed, so either go ahead or wait for my review if it makes you more comfortable. Since I was working on the filedesc stuff I'll take a shot at reviewing it, by way of the diff it looks somewhat ok, I just want to make sure you're getting the fhold/fdrop stuff right. Alfred There's a merged diff here: Alfred http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/pg_fd2.diff It is rather hard for me to dig up what you merged out of that patch. Could you please give me unmerged one? What I did was try to merge the work you've done into the latest -current, it didn't work out too well. Perhaps you can remerge it and pass it to me for testing? Basically, changes in -current conflict with your patch, I was unable to get a stable merge with your patches and -current. -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Tue, 10 Jul 2001 03:53:47 -0500, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Alfred * Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010710 03:46] wrote: On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:20:44 -0500, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I'm going to be giving this code some testing, not that you have to wait for me to finish, but it seems like no one has stepped forward to review this. I'd like to see it committed, so either go ahead or wait for my review if it makes you more comfortable. Since I was working on the filedesc stuff I'll take a shot at reviewing it, by way of the diff it looks somewhat ok, I just want to make sure you're getting the fhold/fdrop stuff right. Alfred There's a merged diff here: Alfred http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/pg_fd2.diff It is rather hard for me to dig up what you merged out of that patch. Could you please give me unmerged one? Alfred What I did was try to merge the work you've done into the latest Alfred -current, it didn't work out too well. Perhaps you can remerge Alfred it and pass it to me for testing? I have already begun merging -current an hour ago. It would take another 3-4 hours to test builing kernels, so could you please be patient until the latest one gets ready to go? -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010707 16:43] wrote: * Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010702 03:13] wrote: On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:04:31 +0900, Seigo Tanimura tanimura said: Seigo The results of build test with the latest patch are now at: Seigo http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/pg_fd/ Seigo As it is likely to take quite a while to fix alpha, I am going to Seigo update the patch every few days. The latest test on alpha shows successful build of a kernel. Is alpha fixed and working now? I'm going to be giving this code some testing, not that you have to wait for me to finish, but it seems like no one has stepped forward to review this. I'd like to see it committed, so either go ahead or wait for my review if it makes you more comfortable. Since I was working on the filedesc stuff I'll take a shot at reviewing it, by way of the diff it looks somewhat ok, I just want to make sure you're getting the fhold/fdrop stuff right. There's a merged diff here: http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/pg_fd2.diff I'm not sure if kern_sig.c is merged properly. I'm also quite sure that you can't call the ktrace functions with any mutexes held so the code is doing to need some help, basically the trick in trapsig() and postsig() is to generate the ktrace IO after the locks have been dropped, this means somehow caching the info sent to ktrace where it's currently called, and calling it later with the cached info after the locks are dropped. Want to give this another spin? -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:42:49PM -0500, Alfred Perlstein wrote: I'm going to be giving this code some testing, not that you have to wait for me to finish, but it seems like no one has stepped forward to review this. I'd like to see it committed, so either go ahead or wait for my review if it makes you more comfortable. Uh.. your go ahead attitude is what made the Alpha so damned unstable. We don't need an encore from you. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
* David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010707 18:06] wrote: On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:42:49PM -0500, Alfred Perlstein wrote: I'm going to be giving this code some testing, not that you have to wait for me to finish, but it seems like no one has stepped forward to review this. I'd like to see it committed, so either go ahead or wait for my review if it makes you more comfortable. Uh.. your go ahead attitude is what made the Alpha so damned unstable. We don't need an encore from you. Piss off david, with everything under giant there's still problems. Go blame someone else. -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:13:57PM -0500, Alfred Perlstein wrote: I'm not interested in wasting time tracking down bugs for your arch. *My* arch?? _OUR_ arches. Anyhow, the simple fact is that if you're unable to cope with some instability for a short amount of time you shouldn't be running -current. You should be sticking to -stable. Short time?? The 5-CURRENT Alpha has been useless for going 3 months now. So I think I will take your advice. BTW, this means no GCC 3.0 for 5.0-RELEASE. Makes my life easier. THNX. Finally, if you're so damn concerned about your precious alpha I expect you or at least ANYONE WHO CARES ABOUT ALPHA TO ASSIST IN TESTING THESE DIFFS. HOW THE FSCK AM I TO TEST THEM WHEN I CANNOT EVEN GET TO SINGLE USER?? -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
Finally, if you're so damn concerned about your precious alpha I expect you or at least ANYONE WHO CARES ABOUT ALPHA TO ASSIST IN TESTING THESE DIFFS. HOW THE FSCK AM I TO TEST THEM WHEN I CANNOT EVEN GET TO SINGLE USER?? By testing them before they're committed, obviously. David - this conversation is not productive, and you're not helping anyone, including yourself, going off like this. Please tone it down, ok? -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:04:31 +0900, Seigo Tanimura tanimura said: Seigo The results of build test with the latest patch are now at: Seigo http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/pg_fd/ Seigo As it is likely to take quite a while to fix alpha, I am going to Seigo update the patch every few days. The latest test on alpha shows successful build of a kernel. Is alpha fixed and working now? -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:48:30 +0900, Seigo Tanimura tanimura said: David It would also be nice to get a timeline on the commit schedule for this. Test of 2 weeks should be enough, followed by commit in 15 June. David I request that this be on hold until we actually get -current Alphas David usable again. Seigo OK, then we can test on pc98 and ia64 to wait for that. The results of build test with the latest patch are now at: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/pg_fd/ As it is likely to take quite a while to fix alpha, I am going to update the patch every few days. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 12:52:23 -0700, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: David On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 09:28:57PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote: David It would also be nice to get a timeline on the commit schedule for this. Test of 2 weeks should be enough, followed by commit in 15 June. David I request that this be on hold until we actually get -current Alphas David usable again. OK, then we can test on pc98 and ia64 to wait for that. Now what do I have to do to test on ia64? -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 04:48:30PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote: Test of 2 weeks should be enough, followed by commit in 15 June. David I request that this be on hold until we actually get -current Alphas David usable again. OK, then we can test on pc98 and ia64 to wait for that. Now what do I have to do to test on ia64? JHB is aware of your patch, so he can either pre-test it on ia64; or since we don't run on HW and you really don't have a chance to mess up users just don't worry about that platform for now. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, 31 May 2001 16:31:21 +0900, Seigo Tanimura tanimura said: Seigo Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio is now ready Seigo for testing. Although the patch is still under test, a new task proposal comes to my mind. A new task: lock underlying objects of struct file, namely a vnode, a socket, a pipe, a fifo and an event queue. A socket and a pipe is not mpsafe for now. A vnode (and a fifo) has an interlock, so it might already be mpsafe. An event queue is... up to jlemon? -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 09:28:57PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote: David It would also be nice to get a timeline on the commit schedule for this. Test of 2 weeks should be enough, followed by commit in 15 June. I request that this be on hold until we actually get -current Alphas usable again. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, 31 May 2001 13:01:56 -0700, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: David On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 12:54:26PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio is now ready for testing. The patch is at http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/patches/fd_pgrp.diff.gz Compiled on Alpha? I think that's what he means by testing. :) I.e., he's ready for people to compile it and report problems, etc. David Committers do not need Alpha users to verify that a patch compiles, David Beast.freebsd.org can be used for that. Testing on a running system is David of course a different matter. I will test building a GENERIC kernel with COMPAT_OSF1 after I get home, in a couple of hours. David It would also be nice to get a timeline on the commit schedule for this. Test of 2 weeks should be enough, followed by commit in 15 June. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 09:28:57PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote: David Committers do not need Alpha users to verify that a patch compiles, David Beast.freebsd.org can be used for that. Testing on a running system is David of course a different matter. I will test building a GENERIC kernel with COMPAT_OSF1 after I get home, in a couple of hours. I think you misunderstand; David was referring to testing compilation on the alpha platform. beast.freebsd.org is available for FreeBSD committers for this purpose. Kris PGP signature
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001 05:44:17 -0700, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: David Committers do not need Alpha users to verify that a patch compiles, David Beast.freebsd.org can be used for that. Testing on a running system is David of course a different matter. I will test building a GENERIC kernel with COMPAT_OSF1 after I get home, in a couple of hours. Kris I think you misunderstand; David was referring to testing compilation Kris on the alpha platform. beast.freebsd.org is available for FreeBSD Kris committers for this purpose. I meant that I cannot start testing *right now* because I have to go back from my lab to my home in a few minutes, during which I will be offline. The test is going to be on beast, of course. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, 31 May 2001 16:31:21 +0900, Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Seigo Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio is now ready Seigo for testing. Seigo The patch is at Seigo http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/patches/fd_pgrp.diff.gz WARNING: rebuild any modules that provide filesystems if you are using them. getpid(2) should now be *really* mpsafe. -- Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 04:31:21PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio is now ready for testing. The patch is at http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/patches/fd_pgrp.diff.gz Compiled on Alpha? -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On 31-May-01 David O'Brien wrote: On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 04:31:21PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio is now ready for testing. The patch is at http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/patches/fd_pgrp.diff.gz Compiled on Alpha? I think that's what he means by testing. :) I.e., he's ready for people to compile it and report problems, etc. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 12:54:26PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio is now ready for testing. The patch is at http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/patches/fd_pgrp.diff.gz Compiled on Alpha? I think that's what he means by testing. :) I.e., he's ready for people to compile it and report problems, etc. Committers do not need Alpha users to verify that a patch compiles, Beast.freebsd.org can be used for that. Testing on a running system is of course a different matter. It would also be nice to get a timeline on the commit schedule for this. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On 31-May-01 David O'Brien wrote: On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 12:54:26PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio is now ready for testing. The patch is at http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/patches/fd_pgrp.diff.gz Compiled on Alpha? I think that's what he means by testing. :) I.e., he's ready for people to compile it and report problems, etc. Committers do not need Alpha users to verify that a patch compiles, Beast.freebsd.org can be used for that. Testing on a running system is of course a different matter. It doesn't hurt to help distribute the load some, though. Requiring each person who makes a change to compile it on every possible arch is not something that will scale as more and more archs are added. If a committer can get someone else to perform some of these test compiles and fix any brokenness that comes up I think that is adequate. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 01:46:00PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: It doesn't hurt to help distribute the load some, though. Requiring each person who makes a change to compile it on every possible arch is not something that will scale as more and more archs are added. It isn't that hard to put the bits on Freefall and test on all arches. Especially for a _KERNEL_ patch that touches this many files -- some Alpha specific. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Lock of struct filedesc, file, pgrp, session and sigio
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 01:46:00PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: It doesn't hurt to help distribute the load some, though. Requiring each person who makes a change to compile it on every possible arch is not something that will scale as more and more archs are added. If a committer can get someone else to perform some of these test compiles and fix any brokenness that comes up I think that is adequate. Forgot to add, if others use the Alpha owners as simple test-compile resources, (1) the Alpha owners will not get any other work done, (2) will get quite tired of testing things that the patch author could easily test himself. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
