Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 18 Mar 2000 03:52:54 -0800
From:      Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: kern/8324
Message-ID:  <200003181152.DAA29093@salsa.gv.tsc.tdk.com>
In-Reply-To: <20000317182756.A14789@fw.wintelcom.net>
References:  <200003180132.RAA89424@bubba.whistle.com> <20000317182756.A14789@fw.wintelcom.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 17,  6:27pm, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
} Subject: Re: kern/8324
} * Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> [000317 17:55] wrote:
} > This bug has been around since at least 2.2.6 and is still present
} > in RELENG_3, RELENG_4, and -current.
} > 
} >   http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=8324
} > 
} > Is anyone planning to tackle it? What would be required to fix it?
} > (it's not clear (to me anyway) from Bruce's description how hard
} > this is to fix..)

I never heard of using SIGIO for output, but section 6.4 of the daemon
book says that SIGIO is sent "when a read or write becomes possible".
On the other hand, section 10.8 (Terminal Operations) mentions SIGIO 
for input but not for output.  I also looked at rev 1.1 of kern/tty.c
and it only sends a SIGIO when input is ready, so this seems to be
the historical behaviour, so I'm suprised that this program even
worked with plain tty devices.

} I think Bruce sort of went off into a tangent with his diagnosis,
} anyhow this is untested (of course :) ), but looks like the right
} thing to do (from sys_pipe.c).
} 
} Perhaps the fcntls and ioctls aren't being propogated enough to set
} the flags properly, but if they are then it should work sort of the
} way SIGIO does, basically generating a signal for /some condition/
} on a descriptor.

This patch (vs the 3.4-STABLE version of tty.c) causes SIGIO to be
sent when a regular or pseudo tty becomes writeable.


--- tty.c.orig	Sun Aug 29 09:26:09 1999
+++ tty.c	Sat Mar 18 03:09:32 2000
@@ -2133,6 +2133,8 @@
 
 	if (tp->t_wsel.si_pid != 0 && tp->t_outq.c_cc <= tp->t_olowat)
 		selwakeup(&tp->t_wsel);
+	if (ISSET(tp->t_state, TS_ASYNC) && tp->t_sigio != NULL)
+		pgsigio(tp->t_sigio, SIGIO, (tp->t_session != NULL));
 	if (ISSET(tp->t_state, TS_BUSY | TS_SO_OCOMPLETE) ==
 	    TS_SO_OCOMPLETE && tp->t_outq.c_cc == 0) {
 		CLR(tp->t_state, TS_SO_OCOMPLETE);


BTW, I had to add:
	fcntl(1, F_SETOWN, getpid());
to the test program since there is no longer a default target to send
the signal to.  The old scheme had the defect of sending SIGIO to the
process group that owned the terminal, which implied that the terminal
had to be the controlling terminal for the process group.  This limited
a process to only receiving SIGIO from one terminal device even if it
had more than one open and it wanted to receive SIGIO from all of them.
Also, SIGIO was sent to the entire process group, but it may be desireable
to limit this to one process.  I wonder if it might make sense to go
back to the old default for tty devices so that processes only receive
SIGIO when they are in the foreground ...


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003181152.DAA29093>