[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090409092302.8D8A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 09:26:15 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs poll should keep the poll rule of normal regular file.
> On Wednesday April 8, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com wrote:
> >
> > Currently, following test programs don't finished.
> >
> > % ruby -e '
> > Thread.new { sleep }
> > File.read("/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies")
> > '
> >
> > strace expose the reason.
> >
> > ...
> > open("/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3
> > ioctl(3, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE or TCGETS, 0xbf9fa6b8) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl for device)
> > fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=4096, ...}) = 0
> > _llseek(3, 0, [0], SEEK_CUR) = 0
> > select(4, [3], NULL, NULL, NULL) = 1 (in [3])
> > read(3, "1400000 1300000 1200000 1100000 1"..., 4096) = 62
> > select(4, [3], NULL, NULL, NULL
> >
> >
> > Because Ruby (the scripting language) VM assume select system-call against regular file don't block.
> > (POSIX gurantee it.)
> > But sysfs_poll() don't keep this rule although sysfs file can read and write always.
>
> It would be nice to include a reference to where POSIX (or SUS)
> guarantees it - though I suspect you are right.
Oh, very good opinion.
following explanation is better?
poll is requireed "Regular files shall always poll TRUE for reading and
writing." by SUSv3.
see http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/poll.html
> I have one piece of code that this would break, but it isn't released
> yet and it is never too late to fix things..
>
> However it should be pointed out that /proc/mounts has exactly the
> same problems (/proc/mdstat doesn't - I guess I was lucky enough to
> get that one right). So we should "fix" /proc/mounts
> (fs/proc/base.c:mounts_poll) at the same time. Assuming that won't
> break anything.
>
> Al: do you have an opinion about changing mounts_poll to always
> report 'readable' to poll?? What would break?
>
> NeilBrown
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists