Re: gconfd process eating CPU
- From: Brian Cameron <Brian Cameron Sun COM>
- To: Mark McLoughlin <markmc redhat com>
- Cc: gconf-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: gconfd process eating CPU
- Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:45:47 -0000
Mark:
4335/1 1: 1.0220 -> liblinc:linc_connection_read(0x34900, 0x14418c, 0x0, 0x0)
4335/1 1: 1.0222 -> liblinc:d_printf(0xff1e5bb0, 0x0, 0xa, 0x0)
4335/1 1: 1.0224 <- liblinc:d_printf() = 0xff1e5bb0
4335/1 1: 1.0228 <- liblinc:linc_connection_read() = 0
-> Here we read the connection and find that it returns zero. That
means the other side of the connection has closed. Looking at
recent ORBit code I'd expect linc_connection_state_changed() to
be called and we'd close our side and remove the source
This makes sense, although looking at the code for link_connection_io_handler
(both the older code and the current CVS code), I don't see how
link_connection_state_changed could get called in this scenario.
Right, linc_connection_read() returns LINC_IO_FATAL_ERROR if read()
returns zero. So, the other side isn't closing the connection then - or
at least that's not what a zero return from linc_connection_read()
means.
So, linc_connection_read() is being passed len == 0. Looking at the
code, the only way that could really happen is if a previous read
returned an error and state_changed (LINC_DISCONNECTED) didn't cause the
watch to be removed.
Do you have any suggestions how I might be able to track down what filehandle
has entered this invalid state? Perhaps if we could identify which program
GConf thinks its talking to, it might highlight what the problem might be.
Dunno, you'd need a debug log from the time when the connection got
into that state.
Do you mean the GCONF debug log that is set by adding this line to
/etc/syslog.conf:
user.debug /var/log/user
Or another, say ORBit2 log, mechanism? We can certainly turn on debug
logging on one of the multi-user servers where we tend to see this problem
keeps popping up.
Do you think it might be an option to make linc a bit smarter so that
if it gets stuck in a loop where it keeps reading 0-length data, that we
could go ahead and drop the connection?
--
Brian
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]