From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 02/11] run-command: report failure for degraded output just once Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 21:36:13 +0100 Message-ID: <563A6C3D.2050805@kdbg.org> References: <1446597434-1740-1-git-send-email-sbeller@google.com> <1446597434-1740-3-git-send-email-sbeller@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" , Ramsay Jones , Jacob Keller , Jeff King , Jonathan Nieder , Johannes Schindelin , Jens Lehmann , Eric Sunshine To: Stefan Beller , Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 04 21:36:23 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zu4n8-0002hs-PT for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 21:36:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965377AbbKDUgS (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2015 15:36:18 -0500 Received: from bsmtp4.bon.at ([195.3.86.186]:34157 "EHLO bsmtp4.bon.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965365AbbKDUgR (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2015 15:36:17 -0500 Received: from dx.site (unknown [93.83.142.38]) by bsmtp4.bon.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nrfrt3mcFz5tlD; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 21:36:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dx.site (Postfix) with ESMTP id E29835370; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 21:36:13 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 04.11.2015 um 21:14 schrieb Stefan Beller: > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Imagine that we are running two things A and B at the same time. We >> ask poll(2) and it says both A and B have some data ready to be >> read, and we try to read from A. strbuf_read_once() would try to >> read up to 8K, relying on the fact that you earlier set the IO to be >> nonblock. It will get stuck reading from A without allowing output >> from B to drain. B's write may get stuck because we are not reading >> from it, and would cause B to stop making progress. >> >> What if the other sides of the connection from A and B are talking >> with each other, > > I am not sure if we want to allow this ever. How would that work with > jobs==1? How do we guarantee to have A and B running at the same time? I think that a scenario where A and B are communicating is rather far-fetched. We are talking about parallelizing independent tasks. I would not worry. -- Hannes