On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 03:42:00PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 01:57:15AM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 03:51:32PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > +# Common execution handling for fsstress invocation. > > > +# > > > +# We need per-test fsstress binaries because of the way fsstress forks and > > > +# tests run it in the background and/or nest it. Trying to kill fsstress > > > +# tasks is unreliable because killing parent fsstress task does not guarantee > > > +# that the children get killed. Hence the historic use of killall for stopping > > > +# execution. > > > +# > > > +# However, we can't just kill all fsstress binaries as multiple tests might be > > > +# running fsstress at the same time. Hence copy the fsstress binary to a test > > > +# specific binary on the test device and use pkill to select that only that > > > +# task name to kill. > > > +# > > > +# If tasks want to start fsstress themselves (e.g. under a different uid) then > > > +# they can set up _FSSTRESS_BIN and record _FSSTRESS_PID themselves. Then if the > > > +# test is killed then it will get cleaned up automatically. > > > + > > > +_FSSTRESS_BIN="$seq.fsstress" > > > +_FSSTRESS_PROG="$TEST_DIR/$seq.fsstress" > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > I'm wondering if the "$seq.fsstress" can be unique name? For example, if generic/561, > > xfs/561, btrfs/561, ext4/561 run fsstress in parallel, won't they have same > > "561.fsstress", then "pkill -PIPE $_FSSTRESS_BIN" kills all these cases' fsstress > > processes? > > Yeah, it's not entirely unique, but it was "good enough" to solve > the problem and move on to the next one. It should be easy enough to Sure, it's good to move on to the next one, due to it doesn't bring in regression for original testing way. We can improve this part later. > change; the reason I used $seq was because it is short, and the > pkill man page says: > > NOTES > The process name used for matching is limited to the 15 > characters present in the output of /proc/<pid>/stat. > > It turns out that this 15 character limit doesn't appear to exist > anymore. I just checked that file on a 6.10.7 kernel, and it > appears that there are full process names in there. pgrep (at least) > matches on process names longer than 15 character, so I suspect that > the man page is simply out of date here. > > Hence we might be able to use something longer and more unique along > with 'pkill -x' to match the full name. i.e. this is a solvable > problem, but not critical to the effective working of concurrent > test running. Good to know that, thanks! So we can use "xfs-561-fsstress" or "$$-$seq-fsstress" or something better idea you have :) Thanks, Zorro > > -Dave. > > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >
