From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22789: 25.1.50; In last master build https connections stop working Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 17:59:36 +0200 Message-ID: <83wppm6vfb.fsf@gnu.org> References: <864mcyo14y.fsf@Lenovo-PC.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <86povm6qeu.wl-j_l_domenech@yahoo.com> <83k2lugeym.fsf@gnu.org> <871t81wtyt.fsf@gnus.org> <87r3g1veqc.fsf@gnus.org> <86si0euizj.fsf@realize.ch> <871t7xhj7t.fsf@gnus.org> <86oab1vjm9.fsf@realize.ch> <86d1rhpvcq.fsf@realize.ch> <834mctbitq.fsf@gnu.org> <868u25p3m2.fsf@realize.ch> <83io18ahya.fsf@gnu.org> <86y4a3on6f.fsf@realize.ch> <87oaazg7fv.fsf@gnus.org> <86twkro0vr.fsf@realize.ch> <83d1rf8ifj.fsf@gnu.org> <86povfnm9r.fsf@realize.ch> <8337sa9865.fsf@gnu.org> <87io16x1k5.fsf@gnus.org> <87d1recmnu.fsf@gnus.org> <86fuwanuku.fsf@realize.ch> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1456848271 17860 80.91.229.3 (1 Mar 2016 16:04:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:04:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: schwab@suse.de, larsi@gnus.org, j_l_domenech@yahoo.com, 22789@debbugs.gnu.org To: Alain Schneble Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 01 17:04:14 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aammT-0002Hx-KO for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 17:04:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50598 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aammS-0000zT-N5 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:04:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43476) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aamjS-0004Be-9A for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:01:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aamjO-0006xg-83 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:01:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:59348) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aamjO-0006xc-4w for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:01:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aamjN-0006ad-So for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:01:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 16:01:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22789 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 22789-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22789.145684800625260 (code B ref 22789); Tue, 01 Mar 2016 16:01:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22789) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2016 16:00:06 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56475 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aamiR-0006YW-Dn for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:00:06 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52188) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aamiN-0006XW-Ah for 22789@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:00:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aamiE-0006g3-6Z for 22789@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:59:54 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:34474) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aamiD-0006fy-W4; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:59:50 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2003 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aamiA-0003uI-SS; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:59:49 -0500 In-reply-to: <86fuwanuku.fsf@realize.ch> (message from Alain Schneble on Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:25:53 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:114242 Archived-At: > From: Alain Schneble > Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:25:53 +0100 > Cc: Andreas Schwab , j_l_domenech@yahoo.com, > 22789@debbugs.gnu.org > > > Andreas Schwab writes: > > > >> Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > >> > >>> And I would guess that the same is true for the async DNS resolution -- > >>> those processes also need some progress, probably? > >> > >> getaddrinfo_a provides async notification (SIGEV_SIGNAL). > > > > But we're not using that. > > > > Anyway, all this async DNS/TLS stuff can probably be taken out of > > wait_reading_process_output completely, and just be run from the > > proposed new timer thing... That'll be cleaner, too. > > But we could probably make use of it and it would not require the timer > at least for the async DNS resolution. It would not solve the TLS issue > though. But maybe there is a similar notification for async sockets > when they get connected? How do you envision we should make use of these notifications through signals? We try very hard not to do anything non-trivial in a signal handler, except setting a flag that is then tested in due time. If that is what you had in mind, then you will face the same problems with testing the flag as we face now: if the loop in wait_reading_process_output is stuck in a call to 'pselect' with a large timeout, Emacs might not be able to test the flag until the timeout ends. > If there exists an approach that does not require timers, then I > guess this would be the preferred one... I think I suggested one such way. In a nutshell, it does the same to the loop as a timer would, but without actually running a timer.