[libvirt] Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] lxc: loop in tty forwarding process

2008-05-08 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 12:47:40PM -0700, Dave Leskovec wrote: Daniel Veillard wrote: On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:51:08AM -0700, Dave Leskovec wrote: [...] -close(vm-parentTty); +//close(vm-parentTty); close(vm-containerTtyFd); if we really don't need this anymore just

[libvirt] Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] lxc: loop in tty forwarding process

2008-05-07 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:51:08AM -0700, Dave Leskovec wrote: This patch changes the lxc tty forwarding process to use epoll instead of poll. This is done to avoid a cpu consuming loop when a user disconnects from the container console. During some testing, we found that when the slave

Re: [libvirt] Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] lxc: loop in tty forwarding process

2008-05-07 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 08:25:58AM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote: On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:51:08AM -0700, Dave Leskovec wrote: This patch changes the lxc tty forwarding process to use epoll instead of poll. This is done to avoid a cpu consuming loop when a user disconnects from the

Re: [libvirt] Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] lxc: loop in tty forwarding process

2008-05-07 Thread Jim Meyering
Daniel Veillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:51:08AM -0700, Dave Leskovec wrote: Sounds fine in principle but i have a couple of questions with the patch +#include stdbool.h err ... what is that ? looks like a linux specific header, do we really need this ? epoll

Re: [libvirt] Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] lxc: loop in tty forwarding process

2008-05-07 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 03:45:46PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: Daniel Veillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:51:08AM -0700, Dave Leskovec wrote: Sounds fine in principle but i have a couple of questions with the patch +#include stdbool.h err ... what is that ?

[libvirt] Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] lxc: loop in tty forwarding process

2008-05-07 Thread Dave Leskovec
Daniel Veillard wrote: On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:51:08AM -0700, Dave Leskovec wrote: [...] -close(vm-parentTty); +//close(vm-parentTty); close(vm-containerTtyFd); if we really don't need this anymore just remove it, if you have doubts then maybe this should be clarified. In