All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
Cc: bitbake-devel-request@lists.openembedded.org,
	Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>,
	Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cooker: release lockfile on process exit
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 13:11:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1432123877.28910.59.camel@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP9ODKo2hE6PtjnOZtgYJP7=OiF8ZEr0Hi0YDZoBrXVwVq7gtw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 18:24 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> ...
> > So having thought more about this, my proposal is actually that rather
> > than fix this and cause all kinds of other potential problems, we just
> > make memory resident bitbake the default which is something we'd like to
> > ideally do in the 1.9 timeframe anyway.
> 
> I understand your background ideas here however the non-deterministic
> lock release is driving us crazy at the autobuilder management. The
> sstate cleanup script, workdir cleanup script and in-house scripts all
> need to be teach to deal with this and this is far from optimal.
> 
> Would be acceptable for you a command line option to 'wait' it to
> release the lock before exit? This could be done easily and we avoid
> side effects. This also provide a solution which is isolated enough to
> be safely backported for previous releases and provide more
> deterministic script output.
> 
> How does it sounds?

I don't know how you'd implement this safely. I did give this some
further thought last night and concluded that if we want to backport
something, the safest approach might be to change the lock acquisition
code.

Basically, if we can't obtain the lock, sleep for one second and try
again. If on the second try we can't obtain the lock, error/exit.

If we need a longer delay than one second, we need to figure out what is
exiting that slowly and fix that instead.

Seems reasonable?

Cheers,

Richard






      reply	other threads:[~2015-05-20 12:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-19 14:14 [PATCH] cooker: release lockfile on process exit Lucas Dutra Nunes
2015-05-19 21:07 ` Richard Purdie
2015-05-19 21:24   ` Otavio Salvador
2015-05-20 12:11     ` Richard Purdie [this message]

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=1432123877.28910.59.camel@linuxfoundation.org \
    --to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=bitbake-devel-request@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=clarson@kergoth.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=otavio@ossystems.com.br \
    /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.