From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yu Zhiguo <yuzg@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: why xenstore-* hangs if xenstored is not started
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:46:54 +0800
Message-ID: <4C20787E.1080206@cn.fujitsu.com>
References: <4C206713.6030508@cn.fujitsu.com> <4C2069F2.9090408@eu.citrix.com>
	<4C206D34.1060909@cn.fujitsu.com> <4C2073FD.5050800@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C2073FD.5050800@eu.citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Vincent Hanquez <vincent.hanquez@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi Vincent,

Vincent Hanquez wrote:
>>
>> Thanks~~
>> I confirmed the task is at D+ and there are no this "problem" if use
>> option -s.
>> But I think S+ is better than D+...
> 
> I don't think it's very easy to have interruptible sleep here, it would
> change radically the protocol. the kernel xenstored page need to be
> handled "atomically" since requests and their replied cannot be
> intertwined. Maybe a timeout would be the one requiring the less change ?
> 

 I'm not familiar with those code and not sure how can fix it,
but I think a timeout is better than doing nothing.


-- 
Regards
Yu Zhiguo