On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 21:45 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
ilya .d wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 07:42:44PM +0000, Andy Farnell wrote:
I know we like to pretend this is "feature", but isn't it time to treat it as a bug?
but havind a simple C progarmm in for(;;) doesn't cause much trouble, SIGINT usualy kills it ..
Pd is _is_ a simple C programm, and [bang(->[until] does something very similar to for(;;);
may be some protection should be considered for [bang(--[until], so it doesn't cause the system such a DoS in this way.. i haven't actually tested this thing yet .. is it really true , or somehow you can kill pd when it get in such a loop ?
that is what i was trying to say (too): it doesn't hang here. it might hang the system, if Pd is running with realtime-priorities. (hey this is what you asked for when turning on rt-priorities)
hm... i still can kill pd, although i am running it with -rt. it just might take me two minutes to kill it. i am not sure, if this actually the main purpose of pd-watchdog, but whenever i see the message 'pd-watchdog: signaling pd', i have a few ms of free cpu time to move the mouse pointer and/or hit some keys. after a few watchdog interrupts i am usuably able to get the xterm, where pd is running in, into focus, so that i can press ctl-c and kill pd.
roman
___________________________________________________________ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de