From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS4713 221.184.0.0/13 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (neon.ruby-lang.org [221.186.184.75]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE7711F97E for ; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 08:43:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F1E121041; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 17:43:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from dcvr.yhbt.net (dcvr.yhbt.net [64.71.152.64]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 295C0120D5D for ; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 17:43:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85A3C1F97E; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 08:43:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 08:43:00 +0000 From: Eric Wong To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Message-ID: <20181124084300.s6e7yto3uuycp77s@whir> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-ML-Name: ruby-core X-Mail-Count: 90030 Cc: Greg.mpls@gmail.com Subject: [ruby-core:90030] Re: [Ruby trunk Bug#14968] [PATCH] io.c: make all pipes nonblocking by default X-BeenThere: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ruby developers List-Id: Ruby developers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ruby-core-bounces@ruby-lang.org Sender: "ruby-core" Greg.mpls@gmail.com wrote: > > @normalperson Eric, > > After a few more builds, the intermittent test failures seem to be: > TestIO#test_readpartial_lock r65948 might help with that one (does IO#nonblock= work for you?) > TestIO#test_recycled_fd_close r65939, r65940 seem to have fixed the alerts I was getting on this from Linux CI machines. Fwiw, I consider r65931, r65937, r65939, r65940 and r65948 worthwhile bugfixes and improvements even if r65922 and r65925 to change the default gets reverted. > These often fail during parallel, occasionally fail during retry. > I've noticed that the bootstraptest suite seems to take about > twice as long as before... Do you have any more details on the slowdown (e.g. profiling info?) Maybe r65948 can help since it reduces GVL activity. Otherwise, I think we can accept win32 and POSIX-like platforms are too different and deserve different defaults (Same as r65929 for socket): https://80x24.org/spew/20181124083700.25685-1-e@80x24.org/raw