All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Licquia <licquia@progeny.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Weird ia64 problem]
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 22:30:35 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1128551435.4623.67.camel@laptop1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1128548614.4623.45.camel@laptop1>

On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 15:09 -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
> >Do you expect a partial write, rather than the EAGAIN?
> 
> I suppose you should expect EAGAIN here: http://tinyurl.com/82wr9
> describes this situation quite clearly.
> 
> So either:
> 1) ia64 thinks 4120 is less than PIPE_BUF, so that it believes
>    that it should not do a partial write

Except that the test code asks the system for PIPE_BUF, and then adds to
it to determine how much to write.  (See lines 26, 32, and 33 of my
test.)  Specifically, we try to write PIPE_BUF + 24 bytes.

> 2) Even though we removed some data from the pipe, it thinks that
>    it is still all the way full.

Hmm.  The spec doesn't seem to say whether a read of PIPE_BUF bytes on a
full pipe _must_ put the pipe in a state where it can accept more input.
The test, certainly, seems to think this is mandatory.

> [My tests on 2.6.14-rc2].
> 
> Which other architectures have you tried this on?  Is ia64 all alone
> in failing this test?

Yup.  In fact, only recent kernels fail; 2.6.8 succeeds, while 2.6.12
fails.

For other architectures, I've tested on i386 and amd64 for both 2.6.8
and 2.6.12 kernels.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-10-05 22:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-10-05 21:43 [Fwd: Weird ia64 problem] Jeff Licquia
2005-10-05 21:54 ` Luck, Tony
2005-10-05 22:09 ` Luck, Tony
2005-10-05 22:13 ` Jeff Licquia
2005-10-05 22:30 ` Jeff Licquia [this message]
2005-10-05 22:33 ` Luck, Tony
2005-10-05 23:09 ` Jeff Licquia
2005-10-05 23:28 ` Luck, Tony
2005-10-05 23:40 ` Luck, Tony
2005-10-06  1:02 ` Ian Wienand
2005-10-07 14:29 ` Jeff Licquia
2005-10-08  2:40 ` Tony Luck

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1128551435.4623.67.camel@laptop1 \
    --to=licquia@progeny.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.