Re: [PATCH 12/34] fuzzy: kill subprocesses with SIGPIPE, not SIGINT

["Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 03:45:50PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 07:33:48PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> > 
> > The next patch in this series fixes various issues with the recently
> > added fstests process isolation scheme by running each new process in a
> > separate process group session.  Unfortunately, the processes in the
> > session are created with SIGINT ignored by default because they are not
> > attached to the controlling terminal.  Therefore, switch the kill signal
> > to SIGPIPE because that is usually fatal and not masked by default.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  common/fuzzy |   13 ++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> I thought I reviewed this, must have missed it.
> 
> > diff --git a/common/fuzzy b/common/fuzzy
> > index 0a2d91542b561e..e9df956e721949 100644
> > --- a/common/fuzzy
> > +++ b/common/fuzzy
> > @@ -891,7 +891,7 @@ __stress_xfs_scrub_loop() {
> >  	local runningfile="$2"
> >  	local scrub_startat="$3"
> >  	shift; shift; shift
> > -	local sigint_ret="$(( $(kill -l SIGINT) + 128 ))"
> > +	local signal_ret="$(( $(kill -l SIGPIPE) + 128 ))"
> >  	local scrublog="$tmp.scrub"
> >  
> >  	while __stress_scrub_running "$scrub_startat" "$runningfile"; do
> > @@ -902,7 +902,7 @@ __stress_xfs_scrub_loop() {
> >  		_scratch_scrub "$@" &> $scrublog
> >  		res=$?
> >  		if [ "$res" -eq "$sigint_ret" ]; then
> 
> s/sigint_ret/signal_ret/

Heh, whoops.  Will fix.

> Otherwise looks fine, so with that fixed:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>

Thanks!

--D

> -Dave.
> 
> -- 
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
>