[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block
From: |
Al Chu |
Subject: |
Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:39:52 -0700 |
On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 10:31 -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 09:19 -0700, Al Chu wrote:
>
> > I really view the engine and the contexts as two separate "objects" the
> > user is responsible for. The user "creates" each context and thus is
> > responsible for "destroying" each one. The user "inits" the engine and
> > responsible for "destroying" it as well. (Perhaps the function names
> > aren't clear? Should be "init" and "cleanup"?? "bringup" and
> > "teardown"??)
> >
> > But I can see how you (and others) might have been confused, thinking
> > after you "submit" a context to the engine, the engine is responsible
> > for destroying it. Was this the confusion?
> >
> > I should definitely make this more clear if it was confusing.
>
> No, this isn't confusing at all. I only started wondering if the engine
> teardown might destroy the contexts as well when I started looking
> through the code and headers and saw that it was supposedly blocking
> until the sessions stopped.
Ok. I think I will add a few more comments/info to the header file
anyways so others might know.
>
> >
> > > > This is fine--I can call ipmi_ctx_destroy() on them afterwards--but if I
> > > > call ipmiconsole_engine_teardown() I have no way of knowing when the
> > > > contexts have all closed their sessions so that I know it's safe to
> > > > start cleaning them all up so I don't get failures due to active
> > > > sessions.
> >
> > If you are witnessing that IPMI sessions are not closed after after
> > ipmiconsole_engine_teardown()? Or just that the ipmi contexts are not
> > destroyed? The later is ok, the former is not ok. Looking at the code
> > again, the logic I put in there indicates that the engine_teardown
> > should not return until each ipmi session closes or times out.
>
> I was calling ipmiconsole_engine_teardown(), which I was assuming would
> block until the sessions all closed.
So is it not closing the sessions?
> It would be handy to have a call that
> does trigger the closing of all sessions such that ipmi_ctx_destroy()
> will work on them afterward, though.
The library should work such that if you do:
engine_teardown();
foreach context I created
ipmi_destroy_ctx(ctx);
This should work. I'll look into this.
Al
>
> --Levi
--
Albert Chu
address@hidden
925-422-5311
Computer Scientist
High Performance Systems Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
- [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Levi Pearson, 2007/06/27
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Al Chu, 2007/06/28
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Al Chu, 2007/06/28
- Message not available
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Levi Pearson, 2007/06/28
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised,
Al Chu <=
- Message not available
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Levi Pearson, 2007/06/28
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Al Chu, 2007/06/28
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Al Chu, 2007/06/28
- Message not available
- Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmiconsole_engine_teardown does not seem to block as advertised, Levi Pearson, 2007/06/28
Message not available
Message not available