On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 10:25:00PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 02:59:42PM +0200, David Disseldorp wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:48:33 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > If you ctrl-c generic/019, it leaves fsstress processes running. > > > Kill them in the cleanup function so that they don't have to be > > > manually killed after interrupting the test. > > > > > > While touching the _cleanup() function, make it do everything that > > > the generic _cleanup function it overrides does and fix the > > > indenting. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > tests/generic/019 | 6 ++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/generic/019 b/tests/generic/019 > > > index db56dac1..cda107f4 100755 > > > --- a/tests/generic/019 > > > +++ b/tests/generic/019 > > > @@ -53,8 +53,10 @@ stop_fail_scratch_dev() > > > # Override the default cleanup function. > > > _cleanup() > > > { > > > - disallow_fail_make_request > > > - rm -f $tmp.* > > > + kill $fs_pid $fio_pid &> /dev/null > > > + disallow_fail_make_request > > > + cd / > > > + rm -r -f $tmp.* > > > } > > > > > > RUN_TIME=$((20+10*$TIME_FACTOR)) > > > > Might be worth unset'ing the "fs_pid" and "fio_pid" variables after the > > wait, but should be fine as-is: > > I agree. Better to avoid killing other system processes. Or how about this place > does (avoid killing system useful processes): > $KILLALL_PROG -q $FSSTRESS_PROG > $KILLALL_PROG -q $FIO_PROG > > Another picky question is, do we need to use a while loop checking, until the > processes really get killed? :) Do we really need to paint the bikeshed over how best to kill a process? I don't have time to do that, this is just a drive-by fix that works for me.... -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx