Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 4 Mar 2000 08:21:26 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: [patch] updates for the pipe code |
| |
Manfred Spraul writes: > The last patch contained a race: if 2 threads read and write to a pipe > concurrently, then wake-up's could get lost. I forgot to check PIPE_LEN > after I reacquired PIPE_LOCK.
Hm. This is a problem with your patch, right? What about the problem I reported back on 16-FEB? It's still happening with 2.3.48. The problem does not occur with 2.2.14.
> Hi, all. I've been noticing odd behaviour with named pipes under > recent 2.3.x kernels (at least since 2.3.36 and possibly before). > > If you open a FIFO with O_RDONLY and then call read(2), and then > another process writes to the FIFO, the read(2) call doesn't return. A > subsequent writer process does wake up the reader, however. > > Has anybody else noticed this behaviour?
I've noticed this problem on UP and SMP systems. It doesn't always happen, but it *does* happen :-(
Regards,
Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |