[PATCH 1/1] Fix bugs determining active VT consoles

[Joe Marcus Clarke]

On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 12:46 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
> On 8/31/07, Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 12:22 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
> > > On 8/30/07, Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > > > On FreeBSD, having a process sit in VT_WAITACTIVE can cause kernel panics or
> > > > unkillable processes that consume 100% of the CPU.  To work around this
> > > > problem, replace the model where individual threads call VT_WAITACTIVE
> > > > with a g_timeout model which checks the active VT every second, and queues
> > > > an event when it changes.
> > >
> > > As I said in the other mail, I don't think we want to do this.  Can
> > > you describe why you think this isn't a FreeBSD kernel bug?
> >
> > I missed the other email, sorry.  From my reading of what this ioctl is
> > supposed to do, it is typically called after activating a given VT to
> > ensure that the VT is active before proceeding.  It should not be
> > something a program sits in for long periods of time.
> 
> According to what or whom?

I read it from Linux Journal:

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2783

That made me think it's used more to see if the switch is complete than
as an event driver.

Joe

> 
> Jon
> 
-- 
Joe Marcus Clarke
FreeBSD GNOME Team      ::      gnome at FreeBSD.org
FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/hal/attachments/20070831/e33cc318/attachment.pgp