public inbox for linux-ia64@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox