From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60298) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0Z1F-00042q-0t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:42:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0Z1E-0008Os-53 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:42:33 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:42:23 -0400 From: Jeff Cody Message-ID: <20170418194223.GK5704@localhost.localdomain> References: <815765cfcea726c7a4cc619c4f6c3bedb47f16b9.1492537347.git.jcody@redhat.com> <20170418193129.GJ5704@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 for-2.10 1/1] qemu-iotests: _cleanup_qemu must be called on exit List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org, kwolf@redhat.com, mreitz@redhat.com On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 02:39:12PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On 04/18/2017 02:31 PM, Jeff Cody wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 01:44:43PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > >> On 04/18/2017 12:45 PM, Jeff Cody wrote: > >>> For the tests that use the common.qemu functions for running a QEMU > >>> process, _cleanup_qemu must be called in the exit function. > >>> > >>> If it is not, if the qemu process aborts, then not all of the droppings > >>> are cleaned up (e.g. pidfile, fifos). > >>> > > >> > >> Looks like you missed (at least?) 063 > >> > > > > I did miss 156. But unless I am missing something, 063 does not use > > common.qemu... > > Good point. 063 does litter, even on success, however: > > $ rm -rf scratch/ > $ ./check -raw 063 > ... > $ ls scratch/ > t.raw.raw1 > > One idea presented in an earlier thread was that common.rc should create > a subdirectory per test (rather than all tests sharing scratch/), and > then common.rc itself install the cleanup hook that wipes out the entire > subdirectory (or maybe even add a command-line option to ./check to > suppress wiping when it is desirable to debug a test failure by seeing > the droppings left behind). > Yep, good ideas. I'll leave that for another series though; there are a few other changes based on some suggestions from Daniel that I'd like to implement as well, and I can fold your suggestions above into a new series (unless someone else does it first). -Jeff