On 2012/8/2 3:29, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012, Giovanni Trematerra wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:21 AM, David Xu <listlog2...@gmail.com>
wrote:
...
The old code broke some history semantic of FIFO pipe, you can try
the test
tool /usr/src/tools/regression/poll/pipepoll, try it before and
after my
commit, also compare the result with 8.3-STABLE, without this commit,
both sub-tests 6c and 6d failed.
This is on Vanilla 9.0-RELEASE where new fifo implementation weren't
backported
FreeBSD bombay 9.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE #3: Tue Dec 27 21:59:00
UTC 2011
r...@build9x64.pcbsd.org:/usr/obj/builds/i386/pcbsd-build90/fbsd-source/9.0/sys/GENERIC
i386
[gianni@bombay] /usr/src/tools/regression/poll#./pipepoll
1..20
not ok 17 FIFO state 6a: expected POLLHUP; got POLLIN | POLLHUP
not ok 18 FIFO state 6b: poll result 0 expected 1. expected POLLHUP;
got 0
not ok 19 FIFO state 6c: expected POLLHUP; got POLLIN | POLLHUP
not ok 20 FIFO state 6d: expected POLLHUP; got POLLIN | POLLHUP
As you can see, sub-tests 6c and 6d failed too on 9. So it's not a
problem with
new code though is irrelevant wrt the commit.
The failure is very differnt. Failure to clear POLLIN in 6a, 6c and 6d
is a normal bug in FreeBSD.
I have attached a patch to fix it, it should make the regression tool happy.
Is it worth to commit ?
Index: sys_pipe.c
===================================================================
--- sys_pipe.c (revision 238936)
+++ sys_pipe.c (working copy)
@@ -1447,7 +1447,6 @@
if ((events & POLLINIGNEOF) == 0) {
if (rpipe->pipe_state & PIPE_EOF) {
- revents |= (events & (POLLIN | POLLRDNORM));
if (wpipe->pipe_present != PIPE_ACTIVE ||
(wpipe->pipe_state & PIPE_EOF))
revents |= POLLHUP;
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
