Thanks for reviewing the patch, please see below comments. > > So here we install the proper handler for signal SIGTERM in the > > similar way. Without this patch, the GT may keep busy after > > running this subtest. Enabling rps should be tracked on the > > other side. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chuansheng Liu <chuansheng.liu@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > tests/i915/i915_pm_rps.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_rps.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_rps.c > > index ef627c0b..8c71c1a1 100644 > > --- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_rps.c > > +++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_rps.c > > @@ -252,6 +252,7 @@ static void load_helper_run(enum load load) > > > > signal(SIGUSR1, load_helper_signal_handler); > > signal(SIGUSR2, load_helper_signal_handler); > > + signal(SIGTERM, load_helper_signal_handler); > > I don't see any behaviour changes to igt to cause it to send SIGTERM on > exit_subtest. Yes, exit_subtest() will not send SIGTERM out. But when main process calls igt_exit() to exit, it hits the below assertion, then goes to fatal_sig_handler() with SIGABORT. (i915_pm_rps:1680) igt_core-CRITICAL: Exiting with status code 98 i915_pm_rps: ../lib/igt_core.c:1775: igt_exit: Assertion `waitpid(-1, &tmp, WNOHANG) == -1 && errno == ECHILD' failed. Received signal SIGABRT. In fatal_sig_handler(), the installed exit handler fork_helper_exit_handler() will send out the SIGTERM to all children process. > > But you might as well just s/SIGUSR2/SIGTERM/ for clearer and common > intentions. Don't get your real point, SIGUSR1 is for actively stopping load_helper, SIGUSR2 is for switching high and low load, the SIGTERM is for passively exiting. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
