Hi Shaopeng,
On 12/1/2022 12:20 AM, Shaopeng Tan (Fujitsu) wrote:
Hi Reinette,
On 11/30/2022 12:32 AM, Shaopeng Tan (Fujitsu) wrote:
Removing ctrl_handler() is only part of the fix in the next version(v5). All fixes as follows.
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c @@ -98,12 +98,17 @@ void cat_test_cleanup(void) remove(RESULT_FILE_NAME2); }
+static void ctrlc_handler_child(int signum, siginfo_t *info, void +*ptr) {
exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);+}
Could you please elaborate why this is necessary?
If enter "ctrl-c" when running "resctrl_tests -t cat", SIGINT will be sent to all processes (parent&child).
At this time, the child process receives a SIGINT signal, but does not take any action. In this case the parent process may not call ctrlc_handler() as expected.
Apologies, but I am not able to follow. My understanding is that the ideal in working an failing case is for the parent to kill the child. Could you please elaborate why the ctrlc_handler() may not be called?
Therefore, ctrlc_handler_child() is necessary.
It may be better to ignore the signal, then code can be simple as follows.
if (bm_pid == 0) { param.mask = l_mask_1; strcpy(param.ctrlgrp, "c1"); strcpy(param.mongrp, "m1"); param.span = cache_size * n / count_of_bits; strcpy(param.filename, RESULT_FILE_NAME1); param.num_of_runs = 0; param.cpu_no = sibling_cpu_no; /* Ignore the signal,and wait to be cleaned up by the parent process */ sigfillset(&sigact.sa_mask); sigact.sa_handler = SIG_IGN; //sigact.sa_sigaction = ctrlc_handler_child; //delete if (sigaction(SIGINT, &sigact, NULL) || sigaction(SIGTERM, &sigact, NULL) || sigaction(SIGHUP, &sigact, NULL)) perror("# sigaction"); } else {
Reinette