[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Curious "buffer_full" line within host_execute

From: David Malcolm
Subject: Re: Curious "buffer_full" line within host_execute
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 08:03:45 -0400

[replying on the mailing list, with Ben's permission to quote his
initial off-list msg]

On Fri, 2014-10-10 at 10:34 +1100, Ben Elliston wrote:
> Hi David,
> You're right that it looks like it should be full_buffer, not
> buffer_full.  What happens if you fix that?

Hacking in a "-d" into runtest's invocation of expect, I see this in the
log (the 1st time through):

  expect: does "" (spawn_id exp0) match glob pattern "buffer_full"? no

i.e. it does indeed treat "buffer_full" as a glob pattern, rather than a

Fixing the spelling to "full_buffer" doesn't fix the issue (log with -d

However, moving the "expect_before" line to *after* the "spawn"
invocation does: is the "expect_before" line too early?

My current belief here is that it's picking up the wrong spawn:
"spawn_id exp0" doesn't seem to be the right thing for it to be
listening on (am I right in thinking that's the "default" stdin/stout,
rather than the not-yet-spawned program?)

Have been attempting to come up with a more minimal reproducer, but
failing so far - some kind of heisenbug timing needed to expose this
issue, perhaps?  Though I reliably hit it with my current setup, with:
  make check-gcc check-jit -j2

[my copy of "Exploring Expect" is due for delivery at some point today,
so may have more conceptual grounding in this in a day
or so].


Attachment: jit.log
Description: Text Data

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]