kern/94772: FIFOs (named pipes) + select() == broken
Bruce Evans
bde at zeta.org.au
Sat Mar 25 05:10:23 UTC 2006
The following reply was made to PR kern/94772; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Bruce Evans <bde at zeta.org.au>
To: Oliver Fromme <olli at lurza.secnetix.de>
Cc: bug-followup at FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/94772: FIFOs (named pipes) + select() == broken
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:08:58 +1100 (EST)
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> I took the liberty to modify your test programs so that
> their output is compliant with the regression framework
> in src/tools/regression.
>
> http://www.secnetix.de/~olli/tmp/pipepoll/
Thanks.
I made some changes (mostly style fixes) and will send patches io
provate mail.
> I also modified them so that they perform all tests both
> with nameless pipes and with FIFOs, without having to
> recompile with different defines.
>
> Shall I open a separate PR to get them commited to
> src/tools/regression/pipepoll?
OK with me. I was going to ask whoever committed the fix for
this PR (not me) to handle the regression tests too. The followup
to this PR is already too long so a separate PR seems best.
> Oh, by the way, the patch set that I mailed still has
> two failure cases with nameless pipes (I didn't notice
> at first because I only tested the NAMEDPIPE case):
>
> not ok 4 Pipe state 6a: expected POLLHUP; got POLLIN | POLLHUP
> not ok 8 Pipe state 6a: expected POLLHUP; got POLLIN | POLLHUP
>
> Those were broken before, too, so my patch doesn't make
> things worse, at least. :-) I'll try to fix those,
> too. However, some feedback on my patches so far would
> be welcome.
This case is unimportant, and as you reported in later mail it is easy
to fix but is another fuzzy area POSIX/original-SysV-poll so everyOS
does it differently.
Bruce
More information about the freebsd-bugs
mailing list