On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 03:26:44PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> If we're not running fsstress as the scrub exerciser, don't set
> _FSSTRESS_PID because the _kill_fsstress call in the cleanup function
> will think that it has to wait for a nonexistant fsstress process.
> This fixes the problem of xfs/565 runtime increasing from 30s to 800s
> because it tries to kill a nonexistent "565.fsstress" process and then
> waits for the fsx loop control process, which hasn't been sent any
> signals.
>
> Cc: <fstests@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v2024.12.08
> Fixes: 8973af00ec212f ("fstests: cleanup fsstress process management")
> Signed-off-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> common/fuzzy | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>
> diff --git a/common/fuzzy b/common/fuzzy
> index 534e91dedbbb43..0a2d91542b561e 100644
> --- a/common/fuzzy
> +++ b/common/fuzzy
> @@ -1392,7 +1392,11 @@ _scratch_xfs_stress_scrub() {
>
> "__stress_scrub_${exerciser}_loop" "$end" "$runningfile" \
> "$remount_period" "$stress_tgt" &
> - _FSSTRESS_PID=$!
> + # The loop is a background process, so _FSSTRESS_PID is set in that
> + # child. Unfortunately, this process doesn't know about it. Therefore
> + # we need to set _FSSTRESS_PID ourselves so that cleanup tries to kill
> + # fsstress.
> + test "${exerciser}" = "fsstress" && _FSSTRESS_PID=$!
Yup, looks fine.
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
