zsh-workers
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de>
To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk
Subject: Re: PATCH: job-control
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:25:22 +0100 (MET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200002020825.JAA09210@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Tue, 1 Feb 2000 16:35:21 +0000


Bart Schaefer wrote:

> ...
> 
> So now you're saying it works to do the child_unblock() *after* the
> waitjobs() rather than before?  That makes no sense; waitjobs() does
> a child_unblock() at the end.  So if the previous child_unblock()
> (inside the !STAT_LOCKED test) worked, then waitjobs() was getting
> called, and this child_unblock() shouldn't make any difference.

See 9498: it caused problems in a case where jobtab[thisjob] didn't
have any procs so that waitjobs() didn't call waitjob() -- and hence
no child_whatever().

> Unless this one is happening in a different call to execpline()?  Does
> the patch below work too?

No, because in that case we *were* calling waitjobs(), without any
effect, though.

> In any case, that last child_block() above should be outside the close
> brace.

Sorry, I had forgotten about that. Although it may be cleaner to put
it directly after the waitjobs() (and call it only if that was
called).

We could also enhance the test for the child{un,}block() to not call
them if we are sure that the waitjob() was called.

This patch instead of Bart's.

Bye
 Sven

diff -ru ../z.old/Src/exec.c Src/exec.c
--- ../z.old/Src/exec.c	Tue Feb  1 14:47:35 2000
+++ Src/exec.c	Wed Feb  2 09:20:29 2000
@@ -932,6 +932,7 @@
     } else {
 	if (newjob != lastwj) {
 	    Job jn = jobtab + newjob;
+	    int updated;
 
 	    if (newjob == list_pipe_job && list_pipe_child)
 		_exit(0);
@@ -980,10 +981,14 @@
 		    jn->stat |= STAT_NOPRINT;
 		    makerunning(jn);
 		}
-		if (!(jn->stat & STAT_LOCKED))
+		if (!(jn->stat & STAT_LOCKED)) {
+		    updated = !!jobtab[thisjob].procs;
 		    waitjobs();
-
-		if (list_pipe_job && jobtab[list_pipe_job].procs &&
+		    child_block();
+		} else
+		    updated = 0;
+		if (!updated &&
+		    list_pipe_job && jobtab[list_pipe_job].procs &&
 		    !(jobtab[list_pipe_job].stat & STAT_STOPPED)) {
 		    child_unblock();
 		    child_block();

--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de


             reply	other threads:[~2000-02-02  8:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-02-02  8:25 Sven Wischnowsky [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-02-01 10:58 Sven Wischnowsky
2000-02-01 16:35 ` Bart Schaefer
2000-01-31 12:53 Sven Wischnowsky
2000-01-31 10:00 Sven Wischnowsky
2000-01-31 10:47 ` Bart Schaefer
2000-01-31 11:52 ` Bart Schaefer
2000-01-18 11:36 Sven Wischnowsky
2000-01-29 18:13 ` Bart Schaefer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200002020825.JAA09210@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de \
    --to=wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de \
    --cc=zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).