we recently tested this on a new IMac (which will not accept a mavericks
install) and while calling rad with -N option still hangs, making an rpiece
call directly works. If you redirect rad with a -n into a shell file and
then run, it works.
···
On Jul 24, 2015 2:00 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Send Radiance-dev mailing list submissions to
[email protected]To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Radiance-dev digest..."Today's Topics:
1. Re: MacOS Yosemite (Jan Wienold)
2. Re: MacOS Yosemite (Gregory J. Ward)----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:36:52 +0200
From: Jan Wienold <[email protected]>
To: code development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowedHi all,
is this problem still existent ? We are currently re-installing several
mac-machines and I'm wondering if I still should go for Maverick to
avoid this problem.thanks!
Best,
Jan
Am 11/18/14 um 7:15 PM schrieb Andreas Noback:
> Hi Greg,
>
> thank you for the quick response. I suspected that it is a bug from
Apple and was hoping that the update today (10.10.1) would change
something, but it does not. In general the Yosemite release seems to me
buggier that the last couple of major updates, so it could be wise to avoid
it for a while ...
>
> Best,
> Andreas
>
>
>> Am 18.11.2014 um 18:58 schrieb Gregory J. Ward <[email protected] > >:
>>
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> A quick follow-up to this. I tried it out on my copy of Yosemite, and
confirmed the problem. It seems to be an intermittent problem with the
system select() call, which means there's little I can do about it except
hope Apple recognizes the issue and posts a patch at some point. The last
change I made in this code related to a hanging condition was in 1997, and
it's been working across Unix implementations since then.
>>
>> For now, I can only suggest you avoid multiprocessing until the next
patch release. You can try reporting a bug to Apple, but without a simple
test case to reproduce it, they are unlikely to do anything other than
register the complaint. I haven't seen anything on the net about it, yet.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Greg
>>
>>> From: "Gregory J. Ward" <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite
>>> Date: November 18, 2014 8:10:48 AM PST
>>>
>>> HI Andreas,
>>>
>>> I am sorry to hear about this issue, and it is unlikely that there is
any way to debug it. A hung process doesn't respond to debugging, either!
>>>
>>> The best approach is to kill one of the processes using "kill -QUIT"
and seeing if it leaves behind a diagnostic file in
$HOME/Library/Logs/CrashReporter/. Then at least, we may find out what
routine it is hanging in.
>>>
>>> The only other idea I had is to disable "App Nap" system-wide to see
if this is causing the problem. See:
>>>
>>> http://www.defaults-write.com/10-9-disable-app-nap-in-os-x
>>>
>>> I don't know why this would affect non-application processes, or why
it would present an issue in 10.10 if it wasn't an issue in 10.9, but it's
worth a try.
>>>
>>> I will see if I can reproduce this on my copy of Yosemite as well.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> -Greg
>>>
>>>> From: Andreas Noback <[email protected]>
>>>> Subject: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite
>>>> Date: November 18, 2014 1:25:27 AM PST
>>>>
>>>> Dear List,
>>>>
>>>> has someone experience with radiance and new MacOS 10.10? I tried it
and got some unpleasant results: If you start rad with the -N option (for
example: rad -N 4 -o x11 -v hem test.rif) it start as usual, but after a
few seconds it seems to stuck, i. e. not responding to input, no further
refining, no processor load. The processes seem to be waiting for something
(forever):
>>>>
>>>> 1447 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -o x11 -v hem test.rif
>>>> 1450 s000 S+ 0:00.03 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>> 1452 s000 S+ 0:00.25 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>> 1453 s000 S+ 0:00.24 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>> 1454 s000 S+ 0:00.24 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>> 1455 s000 S+ 0:00.28 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>>
>>>> Similar things happen if you use it without -o x11 (rad -N 4 -v hem
test.rif): some process start, parts of the image will be rendered. Than
the load goes to zero and nothing happens any more. Here you can see some
zombies:
>>>>
>>>> 1315 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif
>>>> 1318 s000 Z+ 0:00.00 (rad)
>>>> 1325 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>> 1408 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif
>>>> 1409 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj
-vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v
>>>> 1410 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>> 1411 s000 Z+ 0:00.00 (rpict)
>>>> 1412 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif
>>>> 1413 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj
-vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v
>>>> 1414 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>> 1416 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj
-vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v
>>>> 1417 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>>
>>>> There is nothing in the logs. I got the same results with the
precompiled binaries and binaries compiled from the head revision under
10.10 with Xcode 6.1.
>>>>
>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>
>>>> Andreas Noback
>> _______________________________________________
>> Radiance-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiance-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev--
Dr.-Ing. Jan Wienold
Ecole Polytechnique F?d?rale de Lausanne (EPFL)
EPFL ENAC IA LIPIDhttp://people.epfl.ch/jan.wienold
LE 1 111 (Office)
Phone +41 21 69 30849------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:04:58 -0700
From: "Gregory J. Ward" <[email protected]>
To: code development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252Hi Jan,
It's really difficult to find any information on low-level system calls in
Mac OS X. Unfortunately, searching for "select" comes up with many
irrelevant hits, and bug fixes tend to list applications and behavior
rather that root causes. The only really way to tell if the bug has been
fixed is to update to the latest version of Yosemite on one machine and run
some tests using rpiece to see if it hangs. (It's easy enough to test by
running "rad -N 4 -v 1 scene.rif" or similar.)I can perform such a test tomorrow or the next day if no one else has a
current version of Yosemite to try it on. I'm still running Lion, which is
the *oldest* version of Mac OS X that my laptop supports....Cheers,
-Greg> From: Jan Wienold <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite
> Date: July 24, 2015 2:36:52 AM PDT
>
> Hi all,
>
> is this problem still existent ? We are currently re-installing several
mac-machines and I'm wondering if I still should go for Maverick to avoid
this problem.
>
> thanks!
>
> Best,
>
> Jan
>
> Am 11/18/14 um 7:15 PM schrieb Andreas Noback:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> thank you for the quick response. I suspected that it is a bug from
Apple and was hoping that the update today (10.10.1) would change
something, but it does not. In general the Yosemite release seems to me
buggier that the last couple of major updates, so it could be wise to avoid
it for a while ...
>>
>> Best,
>> Andreas
>>
>>
>>> Am 18.11.2014 um 18:58 schrieb Gregory J. Ward <[email protected] > >:
>>>
>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>
>>> A quick follow-up to this. I tried it out on my copy of Yosemite, and
confirmed the problem. It seems to be an intermittent problem with the
system select() call, which means there's little I can do about it except
hope Apple recognizes the issue and posts a patch at some point. The last
change I made in this code related to a hanging condition was in 1997, and
it's been working across Unix implementations since then.
>>>
>>> For now, I can only suggest you avoid multiprocessing until the next
patch release. You can try reporting a bug to Apple, but without a simple
test case to reproduce it, they are unlikely to do anything other than
register the complaint. I haven't seen anything on the net about it, yet.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Greg
>>>
>>>> From: "Gregory J. Ward" <[email protected]>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite
>>>> Date: November 18, 2014 8:10:48 AM PST
>>>>
>>>> HI Andreas,
>>>>
>>>> I am sorry to hear about this issue, and it is unlikely that there is
any way to debug it. A hung process doesn't respond to debugging, either!
>>>>
>>>> The best approach is to kill one of the processes using "kill -QUIT"
and seeing if it leaves behind a diagnostic file in
$HOME/Library/Logs/CrashReporter/. Then at least, we may find out what
routine it is hanging in.
>>>>
>>>> The only other idea I had is to disable "App Nap" system-wide to see
if this is causing the problem. See:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.defaults-write.com/10-9-disable-app-nap-in-os-x
>>>>
>>>> I don't know why this would affect non-application processes, or why
it would present an issue in 10.10 if it wasn't an issue in 10.9, but it's
worth a try.
>>>>
>>>> I will see if I can reproduce this on my copy of Yosemite as well.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> -Greg
>>>>
>>>>> From: Andreas Noback <[email protected]>
>>>>> Subject: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite
>>>>> Date: November 18, 2014 1:25:27 AM PST
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear List,
>>>>>
>>>>> has someone experience with radiance and new MacOS 10.10? I tried it
and got some unpleasant results: If you start rad with the -N option (for
example: rad -N 4 -o x11 -v hem test.rif) it start as usual, but after a
few seconds it seems to stuck, i. e. not responding to input, no further
refining, no processor load. The processes seem to be waiting for something
(forever):
>>>>>
>>>>> 1447 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -o x11 -v hem test.rif
>>>>> 1450 s000 S+ 0:00.03 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>>> 1452 s000 S+ 0:00.25 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>>> 1453 s000 S+ 0:00.24 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>>> 1454 s000 S+ 0:00.24 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>>> 1455 s000 S+ 0:00.28 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0
-vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 -
>>>>>
>>>>> Similar things happen if you use it without -o x11 (rad -N 4 -v hem
test.rif): some process start, parts of the image will be rendered. Than
the load goes to zero and nothing happens any more. Here you can see some
zombies:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1315 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif
>>>>> 1318 s000 Z+ 0:00.00 (rad)
>>>>> 1325 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>>> 1408 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif
>>>>> 1409 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj
-vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v
>>>>> 1410 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>>> 1411 s000 Z+ 0:00.00 (rpict)
>>>>> 1412 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif
>>>>> 1413 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj
-vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v
>>>>> 1414 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>>> 1416 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj
-vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v
>>>>> 1417 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms
0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab
>>>>>
>>>>> There is nothing in the logs. I got the same results with the
precompiled binaries and binaries compiled from the head revision under
10.10 with Xcode 6.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>>
>>>>> Andreas Noback
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Radiance-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Radiance-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
>
> --
> Dr.-Ing. Jan Wienold
> Ecole Polytechnique F?d?rale de Lausanne (EPFL)
> EPFL ENAC IA LIPID
>
> http://people.epfl.ch/jan.wienold
> LE 1 111 (Office)
> Phone +41 21 69 30849
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiance-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Radiance-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-devEnd of Radiance-dev Digest, Vol 102, Issue 2
********************************************