From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/1981
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Earl Chew <earl_chew@agilent.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general
Subject: Re: sv sometimes won't issue down request
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:39:34 -0700
Message-ID: <4A6DE656.7090208@agilent.com>
References: <8F9355C5-C168-4AD7-8B6C-502416E7EECC@zoy.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907130942001.359@e-smith.charlieb.ott.istop.com> <94175859-2733-4ACF-85E9-DD5FF627F23B@zoy.org> <17A739BC-94BA-4611-A523-6978934F0D61@zoy.org> <loom.20090717T090207-38@post.gmane.org> <4A633321.1060207@agilent.com> <loom.20090727T090343-312@post.gmane.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1248716390 12084 80.91.229.12 (27 Jul 2009 17:39:50 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:39:50 +0000 (UTC)
To: supervision@list.skarnet.org
Original-X-From: supervision-return-2216-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Mon Jul 27 19:39:43 2009
Return-path: <supervision-return-2216-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org>
Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@gmane.org
Original-Received: from antah.skarnet.org ([212.85.147.14])
	by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1MVUAp-0000sp-OQ
	for gcsg-supervision@gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:39:43 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 29912 invoked by uid 76); 27 Jul 2009 17:41:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm
List-Post: <mailto:supervision@list.skarnet.org>
List-Help: <mailto:supervision-help@list.skarnet.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:supervision-unsubscribe@list.skarnet.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:supervision-subscribe@list.skarnet.org>
List-Archive: <http://www.skarnet.org/lists/>
Original-Received: (qmail 29904 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2009 17:41:00 -0000
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
In-Reply-To: <loom.20090727T090343-312@post.gmane.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jul 2009 17:39:36.0495 (UTC) FILETIME=[35B4C3F0:01CA0EE1]
X-Scanned-By: MPP/Clamd http://www.messagepartners.com
X-Scanned-By: MPP invoked on aglcosbs01
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:1981
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/1981>

Gerrit Pape wrote:
>> Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>>
>>> I propose just removing this test:
>>>
>>>         if (svstatus.want == *a)
>>>                 return 0;

Gerrit,

My original proposed patch (for the BusyBox implementation) was:

+	if (svstatus.want == *a) {
+		if (*a != 'd' || ! svstatus.pid_le32)
+			return 0;
+	}

which is very similar to your proposed patch:

>    if (svstatus_get() <= 0) return(-1);
> -  if (svstatus[17] == *a) return(0);
> +  if (svstatus[17] == *a)
> +    if (*a != 'd' || svstatus[18] == 1) return(0);


Is it preferred to test for svstatus[18] rather than checking for an
active PID ?


Are you saying that we're better of checking for this "special case"
rather than removing the optimisation in its entirety?


Earl