From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8CE51B581F for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 15:57:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723651020; cv=none; b=lXfK1J1+GKm72g3VAzAcAP29hqH+AbHW8R23cLIXoC7aHhY75a9tuwZpSmTPY3RAnzgLzT6y54Qf9uVxuCBNsNg0SkQ7C/MNSKRWLCU3OvlSe4DRUpOYXUzh7C06A5pelurvl1u3FjKWrtuoCCC3OI/XBpgIOc02Za9+dNfqwfc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723651020; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Yb9BPn+dmI2shHmtTZU3YY9Gy46k7gYN5T4z3//PU5I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=efoIfBxjPnfhh7SgGhROf6gKpGxwZrC6NS8lL8AbTrHn6HniYRO6P55sgikchZyRBri8JNYTaWDypMjtUpw26gvuJBuxMUVjO4S7gKmgv1kcp9DCv68qYz/NggSUMMIAuMoLp6kPWU90+DyLvPrUEBHp7CDGgMCiJGZPXFpLO7Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=HMxU8bYw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="HMxU8bYw" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 02CEBC116B1; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 15:56:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1723651020; bh=Yb9BPn+dmI2shHmtTZU3YY9Gy46k7gYN5T4z3//PU5I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=HMxU8bYwMW19q7n0jCqr3w2eSPL3ebFV2s2/zsJqj9UNWIACfIQ5IhNZZ5cO0U6Uu ymaZbOFvkTtmN2Fn/kx70M97Cfvgy0LyteAIkhSZ4iIN/sdESSn+MnqeMGLntM7fua CZUlfyBJAwlbTaqYZBnVscoxPoUmbJWh7rdEPyv6evTQf9mljoKVEMPAlRhOb7MjSf sg6B1jumkAwcYURa99nq0RYdFKjEUymT2tcDI9wftHcPqpKgV/0KXZjUVF23hlbn6e CBOb3qPHgRfK7+9AhEU1zPNuraRd3jZNV1H1ahPZJuko7HwfzuVXStO9Da7R6xDVMK jddwM5nlUhWtg== Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:56:57 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Veronika Molnarova Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, acme@redhat.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com, atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com, irogers@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, kjain@linux.ibm.com, mpetlan@redhat.com, rstoyano@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] perf test record.sh: Raise limit of open file descriptors Message-ID: References: <20240814151734.15409-1-vmolnaro@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 12:54:51PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 05:42:01PM +0200, Veronika Molnarova wrote: > > > > > > On 8/14/24 17:35, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 12:32:39PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 05:17:34PM +0200, vmolnaro@redhat.com wrote: > > >>> From: Veronika Molnarova > > >> > > >> Ok? I'm applying it with this change. Thanks, > > > > > > So I added this to the log message: > > > > > > Committer notes: > > > > > > Instead of disabling ShellCheck warnings all the uses of 'uname -n', > > > i.e. those: > > > > > > In tests/shell/record.sh line 35: > > > default_fd_limit=$(ulimit -Sn) > > > ^-^ SC3045 (warning): In POSIX sh, ulimit -S is undefined. > > > > > > We can just switch from using '/bin/sh' to '/bin/bash' for this test, as > > > bash _has_ 'ulimit -n', so ShellCheck will not emit that warning. > > > > > > There are dozens of 'perf test' shell tests that do just that, > > > '/bin/bash' is a reasonable expectation for those tests. > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Please let me know if you find any issues with this course of action, > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > - Arnaldo > > > > > If so then the check whether the ulimit is supported doesn't need to be done > > as bash is given as a requirement. Thought that it should be supporting all > > possible shells, even though couldn't find shell not supporting 'ulimit -Sn'. > > > > Can I send a quick fix that just changes to the '/bin/bash' so that the code > > won't have unnecessary code? > > See my last message, I went with your v2 + switch from /bin/sh to > /bin/bash, as you suggest above. And added the '-S' to ulimit, since you changed that from v2, are you sure that is better than using just -n? Why? - Arnaldo