From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 18 22:13:17 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9694716A4CE
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:13:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mail.mundomateo.com (static-24-56-193-117.chrlmi.cablespeed.com
	[24.56.193.117])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 374D243D2D
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:13:17 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from matthew@mundomateo.com)
Received: from [10.0.81.14] (ws14.mundomateo.com [10.0.81.14])
	by mail.mundomateo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C680A60A7
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:13:15 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <423B5277.90304@mundomateo.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:13:11 -0500
From: Matthew Hagerty <matthew@mundomateo.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:59:47 +0000
Subject: Best way to force a process preempt (for troubleshooting)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: matthew@mundomateo.com
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:13:17 -0000

Greetings,

I'm trying to test for the possibility of interleaved data when two more 
more processes are writing to a pipe and more than PIPE_BUF bytes need 
to be written.  How can I make a situation where this scenario can be 
caused reliably so I can make my test case, then apply my patch and make 
sure the changes worked?  Additionally, in one case the processes are 
created from fork() and in another case they are threads (not sure if 
this makes any difference to the scheduler.)

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
Matthew