I don't have time to look at this properly until tomorrow. In the meantime, could you just post the result of...
Delay delaySchedulerClass it should be "DelayExperimentalSpinScheduler" *** Also could you try a few of the other options from World > System > Settings > System ... ***whoops, the Experimental tag should have been dropped for Pharo 5 Release. Its been fine for months (unless this is a fault :) ] On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianop...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi guys, > > I am seeing a problem in Pharo 5.0 regarding Delay >> wait. I cannot explain > how this could happened but it does, and it happened to me a couple of times > (but not fully reproducible). > > In OSSubprocess I have this child watcher: > > initializeChildWatcher > "This is a process which waits for the death of a child processes. Use > SIGCHLD events rather than a Delay to poll." > > | processSynchronizationDelay | > processSynchronizationDelay := Delay forMilliseconds: 20. > childWatcher ifNil: [ > childWatcher := [[ > "OSProcess authors suspected that there were various ways in which OS > signals > could be missed under conditions of heavy load. For that reason, we use > #waitTimeoutMSecs: with the semaphore, so that if a signal is missed, > we time out and rescan occasionally anyway > (#updateActiveChildrenAndNotifyDead > sends queryExitStatus which sends waitpid() ) > " > self sigChldSemaphore waitTimeoutMSecs: 1000. > processSynchronizationDelay wait. "Avoids lost signals in heavy process > switching" > self updateActiveChildrenAndNotifyDead. > ] repeat] newProcess. > > childWatcher resume. > "name selected to look reasonable in the process browser" > childWatcher name: ((ReadStream on: childWatcher hash asString) next: 5) > , ': the OSSubprocess child watcher' > ] > > > The problem is that now above process is hung on the > "processSynchronizationDelay wait.". At least that's what I can see from the > process browser. That should not hung, of course, and should stop waiting > after 20 ms. > > If I inspect the Delay instance in question (doing the wait) I see that the > print string is bad.... "a Delay(20 msecs; 3641032396485 msecs remaining)". > WTF? 20ms and you remain 3641032396485 to wait??? I attach an screenshot of > the Delay instance in case there could be something wrong. > > Maybe it is wrong to keep and re-use same instance of Delay? (note it is > outside the closure) (this was not a problem in the past). Not sure. I've heard others say Delays should only be used once. To experiment, could you try creating a delay each time. cheers -ben
