From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (dan.rpsys.net [93.97.175.187]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506BF6BF8D for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 14:50:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r86F3prZ025113; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 16:03:51 +0100 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dan.rpsys.net Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id xAT00QR7RESH; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 16:03:51 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] (rpvlan0 [192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r86F3ixB025104 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 6 Sep 2013 16:03:46 +0100 Message-ID: <1378479022.3484.6.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: "Burton, Ross" Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 15:50:22 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1378478579.3484.4.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/oeqa/qemurunner: Use a timeout in select() call X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:50:45 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2013-09-06 at 15:46 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote: > On 6 September 2013 15:42, Richard Purdie > wrote: > > - sread, swrite, serror = select.select(socklist, [], [], 0) > > + sread, swrite, serror = select.select(socklist, [], [], 0.1) > > As discussed on IM, for the purposes of this loop a timeout of seconds > instead of fractions of seconds would be more correct, although we're > obviously going to be having diminishing returns. Basically, agreed. I've pushed this into master-next for testing purposes whilst we discuss what this really should be. I think 5 might be a good number. Cheers, Richard