From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263767AbTLTQts (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:49:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263809AbTLTQts (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:49:48 -0500 Received: from port-212-202-159-243.reverse.qsc.de ([212.202.159.243]:8066 "EHLO mail.onestepahead.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263767AbTLTQtq (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:49:46 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.6 vs 2.4 regression when running gnomemeeting From: Christian Meder To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20031220111917.GA18267@elte.hu> References: <1071864709.1044.172.camel@localhost> <1071885178.1044.227.camel@localhost> <3FE3B61C.4070204@cyberone.com.au> <200312201355.08116.kernel@kolivas.org> <1071891168.1044.256.camel@localhost> <3FE3C6FC.7050401@cyberone.com.au> <1071893802.1363.21.camel@localhost> <3FE3D0CB.603@cyberone.com.au> <1071897314.1363.43.camel@localhost> <20031220111917.GA18267@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1071938978.1025.48.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:49:39 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 12:19, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Christian Meder wrote: > > > That would leave me with two possibilities: 2.6. is doing something > > different in the gnomemeeting case or gnomemeeting is doing something > > different in the 2.6 case. A cursory look at the gnomemeeting sources > > didn't give me the impression that it's doing anything which would be > > affected by 2.6 deployment but I'll ask on the gnomemeeting-devel list > > for advice. > > yep, i've looked at the source too and it doesnt do anything that > changed in 2.6 from an interactivity POV. Stefan Bruens pointed out on the gnomemeeting-devel list that pwlib which gnomemeeting is using executes sched_yield and that perhaps there is a problem akin to the openoffice busy-loop on sched_yield() problem earlier this year. I found the following sched_yield code in pwlib 1.5.2 in src/ptlib/unix/tlibthrd.cxx: > static BOOL PAssertThreadOp(int retval, > unsigned & retry, > const char * funcname, > const char * file, > unsigned line) > { > if (retval == 0) { > PTRACE_IF(2, retry > 0, "PWLib\t" << funcname << " required " << retry << " > retries!"); > return FALSE; > } > > if (errno == EINTR || errno == EAGAIN) { > if (++retry < 1000) { > #if defined(P_RTEMS) > sched_yield(); > #else > usleep(10000); // Basically just swap out thread to try and clear blockage > #endif > return TRUE; // Return value to try again > } > // Give up and assert > } > > PAssertFunc(file, line, NULL, psprintf("Function %s failed", funcname)); > return FALSE; > } Is this obviously broken for 2.6 usage ? Christian -- Christian Meder, email: chris@onestepahead.de What's the railroad to me ? I never go to see Where it ends. It fills a few hollows, And makes banks for the swallows, It sets the sand a-blowing, And the blackberries a-growing. (Henry David Thoreau)