Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423655AbbEEWRm (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 18:17:42 -0400 Received: from cluster-a.mailcontrol.com ([85.115.52.190]:49270 "EHLO cluster-a.mailcontrol.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933716AbbEEWQe (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 18:16:34 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 16585 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 18:16:34 EDT From: Chris Purvis To: "'Peter Hurley'" , Nic Percival , "'Michael Matz'" , Kevin Fletcher , Paul Matthews CC: "'NeilBrown'" , "'Greg Kroah-Hartman'" , "'Jiri Slaby'" , "'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" Subject: RE: [PATCH bisected regression] input_available_p() sometimes says 'no' when it should say 'yes' Thread-Topic: [PATCH bisected regression] input_available_p() sometimes says 'no' when it should say 'yes' Thread-Index: AQHQhzhyQb9/8GCIR0mC7rY2jBarap1tYtIQgABBfsA= Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 17:39:56 +0000 Message-ID: <2F7A2F2395CAC340B30E7E8A7D95533DB672C33F@NWB-EXCHANGE4.microfocus.com> References: <20150501162040.05c0cb42@notabene.brown> <5543964C.9030606@hurleysoftware.com> <5548A718.7070305@hurleysoftware.com> <5548C59D.60608@hurleysoftware.com> <2F7A2F2395CAC340B30E7E8A7D95533DB672BFF5@NWB-EXCHANGE4.microfocus.com> <5548C732.7070209@hurleysoftware.com> <2F7A2F2395CAC340B30E7E8A7D95533DB672C022@NWB-EXCHANGE4.microfocus.com> In-Reply-To: <2F7A2F2395CAC340B30E7E8A7D95533DB672C022@NWB-EXCHANGE4.microfocus.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.120.12.163] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by nfs id t45MKNas008219 Content-Length: 1125 Lines: 22 Apologies all. Nic and I did not realise that an internal email had been cross-posted to a public mail list (let alone one with strict email formatting rules!), and were having a hard time understanding the context for the emails we were receiving. I have a certain amount of experience of asynchronous communication and protocol design: we aren't novices in this area. One would hope in the kind of intra-machine protocol that we're using here that, if we know the sender is halted, there should be a way of clearing the contents of the channel so that the receiver can get hold of whatever has been put in to it. Can tcflush() (or some similar API) be used to resolve our debugging scenario? Regards, Chris -- Chris Purvis Senior Development Manager Micro Focus chris.purvis@microfocus.com The Lawn, 22-30 Old Bath Road Newbury, Berkshire, RG14 1QN, UK Direct: +44 1635 565282 This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. www.websense.com ????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?