Hi Urban,
> Anyway,
> gdb is doing strange things to your testprogram on ext2 as well. Does it
> work for you? I have not been able to reproduce a gdb hang (you do know
> that there is a while(1); in main ... ;-), but it generates a lot of smbfs
> messages and in one case made smbfs stop working.
I put the while(1) there to give all threads time to do their work.
You know, it was just a quick & dirty test case.
> Hmm, strange. Why does it only copy one file? Looking at the last
> process gives a sleeping process in rt_sigsuspend, like you
> reported in your strace. Am I using gdb incorrectly?
I don't think so, but I'm not a gdb expert. In any case, I did test
the program on ext2 and it behaved correctly all the time. You don't
need gdb to reproduce the smbfs problems, you can also use strace.
So there's nothing wrong with gdb.
> The patch below vs 2.2.18 should remove the -512 (-ERESTARTSYS) errors.
>
> But I don't like it at all. It blocks all signals, including SIGKILL, for
> a while. The problem is that tcp_recvmsg checks if there is a signal (any
> signal) and aborts with -ERESTARTSYS (a comment says it only cares about
> SIGURG, maybe that could be changed instead).
>
> Could you test if this fixes the gdb problem? And try gdb with all files
> on ext2 too. For me there is no difference between that and smbfs vs a
> NT4.
It seems to work perfectly. I tested with up to 10 threads in 2
simulteneous processes with both ext2 and smbfs. I'll do further
testing in the next days.
Many thanks for fixing that.
Regards,
hjb
-- Pro-Linux - Germany's largest volunteer Linux support site http://www.pro-linux.de/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 07 2001 - 21:00:14 EST