Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-10 Thread Philippe Gerum
Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi, the watchdog is currently broken in trunk (zombie [...] would not die...). In fact, it should also be broken in older versions, but only recent

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-10 Thread Jan Kiszka
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Meanwhile I played with some light-weight approach to relax a thread that received a signal (according to do_sigwake_event). Worked, but only once due to a limitation (if not bug) of

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-10 Thread Gilles Chanteperdrix
Jan Kiszka wrote: Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Meanwhile I played with some light-weight approach to relax a thread that received a signal (according to do_sigwake_event). Worked, but only once due to a

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Philippe Gerum
Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi, the watchdog is currently broken in trunk (zombie [...] would not die...). In fact, it should also be broken in older versions, but only recent thread termination rework made this visible. When a Xenomai CPU hog is caught by the watchdog, xnpod_delete_thread is

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Gilles Chanteperdrix
Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: the watchdog strikes. The second one brought me to another issue: Raise SIGKILL for the current thread and make sure that it can be processed by Linux (e.g. via xnpod_suspend_thread(cpu-hog). Unfortunately, there is no way to force a

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Philippe Gerum
Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi, the watchdog is currently broken in trunk (zombie [...] would not die...). In fact, it should also be broken in older versions, but only recent thread termination rework made this visible. When a Xenomai CPU hog is caught by

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Jan Kiszka
Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi, the watchdog is currently broken in trunk (zombie [...] would not die...). In fact, it should also be broken in older versions, but only recent thread termination rework made this visible. When a Xenomai

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Jan Kiszka
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: the watchdog strikes. The second one brought me to another issue: Raise SIGKILL for the current thread and make sure that it can be processed by Linux (e.g. via xnpod_suspend_thread(cpu-hog). Unfortunately,

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Jan Kiszka
Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Meanwhile I played with some light-weight approach to relax a thread that received a signal (according to do_sigwake_event). Worked, but only once due to a limitation (if not bug) of I-pipe x86: in __ipipe_run_isr, it does not handle the case that a

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Philippe Gerum
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: the watchdog strikes. The second one brought me to another issue: Raise SIGKILL for the current thread and make sure that it can be processed by Linux (e.g. via xnpod_suspend_thread(cpu-hog). Unfortunately,

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Philippe Gerum
Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Meanwhile I played with some light-weight approach to relax a thread that received a signal (according to do_sigwake_event). Worked, but only once due to a limitation (if not bug) of I-pipe x86: in __ipipe_run_isr, it does not handle

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Philippe Gerum
Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi, the watchdog is currently broken in trunk (zombie [...] would not die...). In fact, it should also be broken in older versions, but only recent thread termination rework made this

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Gilles Chanteperdrix
Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Meanwhile I played with some light-weight approach to relax a thread that received a signal (according to do_sigwake_event). Worked, but only once due to a limitation (if not bug) of I-pipe x86: in

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Jan Kiszka
Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Meanwhile I played with some light-weight approach to relax a thread that received a signal (according to do_sigwake_event). Worked, but only once due to a limitation (if not bug) of I-pipe x86: in

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-09 Thread Jan Kiszka
Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi, the watchdog is currently broken in trunk (zombie [...] would not die...). In fact, it should also be broken in older versions, but only recent thread termination

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-08 Thread Gilles Chanteperdrix
Jan Kiszka wrote: Linux (e.g. via xnpod_suspend_thread(cpu-hog). Unfortunately, there is no way to force a shadow thread into secondary mode to handle pending Linux signals unless that thread issues a syscall once in a while. And that raises the question if we shouldn't improve this as well

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-08 Thread Jan Kiszka
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Linux (e.g. via xnpod_suspend_thread(cpu-hog). Unfortunately, there is no way to force a shadow thread into secondary mode to handle pending Linux signals unless that thread issues a syscall once in a while. And that raises the question if we

Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery

2009-03-08 Thread Jan Kiszka
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Linux (e.g. via xnpod_suspend_thread(cpu-hog). Unfortunately, there is no way to force a shadow thread into secondary mode to handle pending Linux signals unless that thread issues a syscall once in a