Subject: bug#78499: tramp-accept-process-output busy-waits

From: Michael Albinus <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:22:24 +0200

Daniel Colascione <[email-masked]> writes:

Hi Daniel,

>>tramp-accept-process-output has seen several implementation iterations
>>ove the years. I'm happy, that it looks stable now.
>>
>>Could you please show a problem with the current implementation, which
>>needs to be fixed?
> .
> 100% CPU use while we're waiting to receive bytes from the peer is a
> priori a problem that needs to be fixed. Good software doesn't busy
> wait. We have a perfectly good mechanism for waiting for something to
> happen with timeouts and we shouldn't avoid them on account of years
> of accumulated changes or compatibility with ancient and irrelevant
> bugs.

"A priori" isn't a bug recipe. Pls show me a recipe indicating a
misbehavior, which needs to be fixed.

Best regards, Michael.