Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
workaround a limit on the number of pty's, surely there's a way to increase
this?
Regards
Steve
=
"Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
> 90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
> workaround a limit on the number of pty's, surely there's a way to increase
> this?
You need
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 02:05:03PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
> > 90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
> > workaround a limi
Vlad GALU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Alternatively, set kern.pts.enable to 1, and find and fix the
> > hang-on-close bug in the pts code (if it hasn't been fixed already)
> Looks like it hasn't been. A friend who tried to set up an access
> ser
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vlad GALU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Alternatively, set kern.pts.enable to 1, and find and fix the
> > > hang-on-close bug in the pts code (if it hasn't been fixed already)
> > Lo
On 10/2/07, Vlad GALU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Vlad GALU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Alternatively, set kern.pts.enable to 1, and find and fix the
> > > > hang-on-close b
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Any one got any pointers on this, the machine we running this app on is over
> > 90% idle so I really don't want to have to install a second machine just to
> > workaround a limit on the n
"Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
> he can catch up with the thread.
Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce the hang-on-close bug.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
> > he can catch up with the thread.
>
> Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce the hang-on-close bug.
Strangely enough
"Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
> > > he can catch up with the thread.
> > Which symptoms? I can no longer reproduce the ha
On 10/2/07, Vlad GALU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
> > > he can catch up with the thread.
> >
> > Which symptoms? I can no
* Vlad GALU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
> > > he can catch up with the thread.
> >
> > Which symptoms? I can no longer re
On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > "Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
> > > > he can catch up w
* Ed Schouten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Vlad GALU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/2/07, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "Vlad GALU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > The symptoms were exhibited even with rev. 1.16. I've CC'ed him so
> > > > he can catch up with the
Ed Schouten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is a known issue IIRC. See line 245 of tty_pts.c 1.16. Can be
> easily reproduced by killing the sshd while apps are still running in
> the shell.
It's not that simple. The question is why t_refcnt > 1 when there are
no processes left attached to the
Thanks for the tip there but I cant find any function called pty_create_slave
in the source.
N.B. Machine is running 5.4 but I also looked on 6.2 which we could upgrade
to but still couldn't find it, so I assume you may be talking about something
that's in current which we couldn't risk on this m
>> Hi. First off, to get it out of the way, I work for Comtrol. This is a
>> Comtrol GMBH (used to be Comtrol UK, now Comtrol GMBH [Switzerland])
>> product. The two are separate companies now. Anyhow, if you have had
>> this card for less than 30 days, I would hi,ghly recommend returning it
>> to
Hi guys, we need critical sections for userland here.
This is basically to avoid a process being switched out while holding
a user level spinlock.
The way I envisioned doing this was as follows:
1) syscall that sets a pointer in the struct thread.
2) user mlocks that page.
3) when scheduler goes
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Hi guys, we need critical sections for userland here.
This is basically to avoid a process being switched out while holding
a user level spinlock.
Setting the scheduling class to real-time and using SCHED_FIFO
and adjusting the thread priority aroun
* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> >Hi guys, we need critical sections for userland here.
> >
> >This is basically to avoid a process being switched out while holding
> >a user level spinlock.
>
> Setting the scheduling cla
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Hi guys, we need critical sections for userland here.
This is basically to avoid a process being switched out while holding
a user level spinlock
* Kip Macy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 20:00] wrote:
> On 10/2/07, Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > >
> > > >Hi guys, we need critical sections for userland here.
> > > >
* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 20:02] wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> >* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
> >>On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi guys, we need critical sections for userland here.
> >>>
> >>>This i
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 20:02] wrote:
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Hi guys, we need critical sections for u
* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 20:16] wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> >* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 20:02] wrote:
> >>On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >>
> >>>* Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
> On Tue
On 10/2/07, Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> > * Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 20:02] wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >>
> >>> * Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
> On Tue,
On 10/2/07, Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 19:46] wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> > >Hi guys, we need critical sections for userland here.
> > >
> > >This is basically to avoid a process being switched out whil
* Kip Macy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071002 20:24] wrote:
> See /sys/priority.h realtime is right below ithreads in terms of
> priority. One of the big motivations for gang scheduling and part of
> the reason why SMP guests often perform poorly is that apps / VMs
> don't scale well if they're deschedul
"Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for the tip there but I cant find any function called pty_create_slave
> in the source.
Just grep your source tree for occurrences of pqrsPQRS.
> Is this something that's possible on 5.x / 6.2 or something that will need a
> lot of work?
It
29 matches
Mail list logo
