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
