Hey Dridi, That looks pretty cool. Having a separate initialisation step and doing the syncing via a socket sounds like a cleaner approach than what I did.
I didn't spend all that much time on my ipcsema thing, so not to worry. :-) -Dag On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Dag Haavi Finstad > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi guys >> >> At the latest dev meeting in Rotterdam it was brought up that it would >> be a useful addition to be able to sync a varnishtest semaphore with >> Varnish itself. >> >> snip >> >> Please take a look - any ideas or feedback will be most welcome. > > Hi Dag, > > I sent a similar patch set off-list last night and we had offline > discussions on IPC sema in varnishtest. The consensus is to retire > semaphores in their current state and introduce non-cyclic barriers > that would need to be explicitly initialized and would work in either > local (cond) or shared (socket) mode. > > The syntax will look like this: > >> # initialization >> barrier b1 cond 2 >> barrier b2 socket 2 >> >> # usage in varnishtest, you don't "sync N" anymore >> barrier b1 sync >> >> # usage in VCL >> debug.barrier_sync("${b2_sock}"); > > I'll send patches to the list, that's unfortunate that we worked on > the same thing around the same time :( > > Cheers, > Dridi -- Dag Haavi Finstad Software Developer | Varnish Software Mobile: +47 476 64 134 We Make Websites Fly! _______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
