On Wed, Mar 24 2021, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:01:49PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> Hi Ævar,
>>
>> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Mar 19 2021, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> >
>> > >> On Tue, Jan 29 2019, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx>
>> > >> >
>> > >> > It seems that every once in a while in the Git for Windows SDK, there
>> > >> > are some transient file locking issues preventing the test clean up to
>> > >> > delete the trash directory. Let's be gentle and try again five seconds
>> > >> > later, and only error out if it still fails the second time.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > This change helps Windows, and does not hurt any other platform
>> > >> > (normally, it is highly unlikely that said deletion fails, and if it
>> > >> > does, normally it will fail again even 5 seconds later).
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx>
>> > >> > ---
>> > >> > t/test-lib.sh | 6 +++++-
>> > >> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> > >> >
>> > >> > diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh
>> > >> > index f31a1c8f79..9c0ca5effb 100644
>> > >> > --- a/t/test-lib.sh
>> > >> > +++ b/t/test-lib.sh
>> > >> > @@ -1104,7 +1104,11 @@ test_done () {
>> > >> > error "Tests passed but trash directory already removed before test cleanup; aborting"
>> > >> >
>> > >> > cd "$TRASH_DIRECTORY/.." &&
>> > >> > - rm -fr "$TRASH_DIRECTORY" ||
>> > >> > + rm -fr "$TRASH_DIRECTORY" || {
>> > >> > + # try again in a bit
>> > >> > + sleep 5;
>> > >> > + rm -fr "$TRASH_DIRECTORY"
>> > >> > + } ||
>> > >> > error "Tests passed but test cleanup failed; aborting"
>> > >> > fi
>> > >> > test_at_end_hook_
>> > >>
>> > >> I saw this sleep while reading some test-lib.sh code, doesn't this break
>> > >> df4c0d1a79 (test-lib: abort when can't remove trash directory,
>> > >> 2017-04-20) for non-Windows platforms?
>> > >
>> > > It does not really break it, it just delays the inevitable failure.
>>
>> I still think this is the best answer to this (implicit) question:
>>
>> > In any case, your patch clearly undoes whatever canary for gc issues
>> > df4c0d1a792 was trying to put into the test-lib, but didn't say so in
>> > its commit message.
>>
>> I was not _really_ paying attention to that commit when I implemented the
>> work-around you mentioned above. At the same time I think it does _not_
>> undo the canary. If the trash directory cannot be removed via `rm -fr`,
>> and if that is an indicator for something fishy going on, chances are that
>> the second `rm -fr` a couple seconds later will _also_ fail, and we still
>> get that error message.
>>
>> The only reason why the second `rm` should succeed, at least that I can
>> think of, is that something on Windows blocked those files from being
>> deleted, and it is no longer blocking after a couple seconds, and that
>> usually means that an anti-malware scanned those files.
>
> Both commits referenced in df4c0d1a79's log message fixed races
> between 'test_done's cleanup and a still running background 'git gc',
> and df4c0d1a79 was meant to draw our attention to similar issues in
> the future. And it did:
>
> https://public-inbox.org/git/20190602091919.GN951@xxxxxxxxxx/
>
> So no, the failure is not inevitable, there are other reasons why the
> second 'rm' might still succeed after the first failed, even just a
> fraction of a second later. And yes, that 'sleep' added in the patch
> above did unquestionably break that canary,
Having read that thread now I agree, but I also left with a "who cares?"
and "so let's keep the sleep then?".
I.e. is this a problem that any of the software we're maintaining is
going to care about in the wild, it's not like people are expecting gc,
repack, fast-import etc. to behave well in the face of rm -rfing the
directory they're operating on.
So it seems like just an issue that crops up because of how our test
suite manages and removes per-test trash directories. So it seems better
to:
1. Just keep that "sleep a bit" and retry hack
2. Maybe on some/most platforms we can use cgroups or whatever passes
for a reliable "I started a process tree starting at this PID, kill
-9 the whole thing please" before cleanup these days.
