Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:02:18 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
To:        Dan Langille <dan@langille.org>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] : libc_r/uthread/uthread_write.c
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309290859280.25117-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <3F77D27E.6203.3321BA14@localhost>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Dan Langille wrote:

> On 18 Sep 2003 at 7:50, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Right, this seems correct to me.
> 
> All our testing on this patch has been successful.  I'm going to do a 
> few more tests on different hardware under 4.8-stable.
> 
> What's the next step?  Commit it?  Get others to test with it first?  

Sure, it looks good enough to commit.

> > 
> > > The problem  found when running under pthreads on 4.8-stable [i.e. 
> > > EOT is not returned to the application code] is not found with libkse 
> > > on 5.1-current.
> 
> FWIW: our regression tests are failing under 5.1 and we suspect that 
> MTIOCERRSTAT ioctl() has changed since 4.8.  We're getting:
> 
> btape: dev.c:1119 Doing MTIOCERRSTAT errno=22 ERR=Invalid argument
> 
> We'll continue with our 5.1 work, but we'd like to finish up with 4.8 
> ASAP.

Well, I can commit it to -current first, then it can go into
-stable.  I'm not sure about the ioctl, though.

-- 
Dan Eischen



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10309290859280.25117-100000>