Re: [9fans] xcpu fix for Plan9.c

[Ronald G Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov>]

YAMANASHI Takeshi wrote:
>>sorry about the error, I have put a fix (untested, no time this morning) 
>>on /n/sources/9grid/Plan9.c
> 
> 
> Thanks, but you forgot to put "int kidfds[3]" in, it seems.
> 
> === 
> void runit(void *ac) {
> 	Client *c = ac;
>  :
> 	int kidfds[3];
> === 

thanks, fixed.

> 
> With this addition in Plan9.c, I was able to run xcpusrv on Plan 9
> while /n/xcpu/0/arch always returns "linux". :)

fixed, for 386; will try to put in a read of the right # files but I 
just ran out of time today.

> 
> By the way, tokenize() in runit() will abort if c->argv is nil.
> You can do this by issuing "echo exec > ctl" without
> "echo something > argv" done beforehand.

I think it might be sensible to not let the echo exec > ctl operation 
happen until argv is set? What do you think? I don't see a point in 
letting it run without args.

This argv model was in the original xcpu stuff, should we really instead 
be doing this:
echo exec date > ctl, i.e. just require the args as part of the exec 
command? It seems easier to me somehow to do it this way.

> 
> Oh, one more thing in xcpu.pdf.
> 
> There seems to be a typo in the example for setting up argv on p.12.
> 	Next, argv:
> 	  for i in $NODES
> 	  do
> 	  echo date > /mnt/xcpu/0/xcpu/$i/exec&
> 	  done
> 	  wait
> 
> The file date is echoed should be argv, not exec.

thanks, fixed.

thanks for looking at this. It is much appreciated.

ron