Re: [PATCH] Fix blocking read timeouts at a small probability
On 2/10/21 11:59 AM, Koichi Murase wrote: 2021年2月10日(水) 23:40 Chet Ramey : On 2/10/21 10:21 AM, Chet Ramey wrote: Thanks for the analysis and patch. I'll take a look. At first glance, I would like to find a simpler way to do it. Thank you. Yes, if there is a simpler but still robust and reliable way to do it, that would be nice. There is, in fact, a simpler way for this case. Blocking SIGCHLD around the calls to zread and its siblings fixes the problem. It might not be enough of a general solution for you, though. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRUc...@case.eduhttp://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
Re: [PATCH] Fix blocking read timeouts at a small probability
2021年2月12日(金) 4:27 Chet Ramey : > > Thank you. Yes, if there is a simpler but still robust and reliable > > way to do it, that would be nice. > > There is, in fact, a simpler way for this case. Blocking SIGCHLD around the > calls to zread and its siblings fixes the problem. It might not be enough > of a general solution for you, though. Thank you for the fix. Now I see why this particular form (CMD & read -t) < XXX caused a significantly large timeout-failure rate. But, I guess the failure rate is almost zero but not exactly zero even after this fix. As I have already written, as far as the probability is non-zero, I'm afraid of a situation that another unexpected usage might cause another relatively large failure rate... Besides, I'm actually afraid of problems with very small probability more than the ones with a large probability because they are hard to debug. -- Koichi
