Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #470801 +++
Description of problem:
After open(2) on /proc/xen/xenbus with O_NONBLOCK flag, read(2) on the
file is blocked, and wait for an event.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-xen-2.6.18-92.el5
How reproducible:
Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. open ("/proc/xen/xenbus", O_RDONLY | O_NONBLOCK);
2. read (fd, buf, 4096);
Actual results:
read(2) is blocked.
Expected results:
read(2) shall return EAGAIN.
--- Additional comment from bburns on 2009-02-24 14:47:39 EST ---
Assigned.
--- Additional comment from pm-rhel on 2010-02-09 17:38:06 EST ---
Since the release flag was set to ? after the pm_ack flag was set
to + (was likely set for the previous release), the pm_ack flag has
been reset to ? by the bugbot (pm-rhel). This action ensures the
proper review by Product Management.
Comment 2RHEL Program Management
2010-06-23 16:52:55 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux major release. Product Management has requested further
review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux Major release. This request is not yet committed for
inclusion.
Comment 4RHEL Program Management
2010-07-15 14:26:23 UTC
This issue has been proposed when we are only considering blocker
issues in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. It has
been denied for the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release.
** If you would still like this issue considered for the current
release, ask your support representative to file as a blocker on
your behalf. Otherwise ask that it be considered for the next
Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. **
Comment 7RHEL Program Management
2010-11-19 20:19:35 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion
in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has
requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release.
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-0542.html